Hello! Quoting r. shaharf ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) "RE: [openib-general] Some Missing Features from mthca/user MAD access": > > > After consideration, I think the proper way is add a reference count > When did ioctl go out of fashion? What is the big difference between > ioctl and an embedded field in the umad structure? Both are binary > parameters.
I think I agree that the format of data you are passing to write must be either ascii or > Personally I think that non binary format is better when applicable - > this mean issm file (you can say it is Plan9 style...). It would not > necessarily use the open method. You may want to use the write method > and to enable everyone read the file. This read may return the pid of > the owner (== the first to write something into the file). [... ] Ugh ... reads returning a value different from write. In my humble opinion, the cleanest approach would be to simply have a file which we can write 1 toset is sm and 0 to clean is sm, read returning the current value. Close would clean the bit, if set. If set to 1, write of 1 would fail. I think this is almost implementable over sysfs, except that we dont get a hook on "close". Maybe we shall just try to add a "close" hook to sysfs, and push it upstream? MST _______________________________________________ openib-general mailing list [email protected] http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
