Thanks for the kind words Tom. Indeed, Ammasso is fully open source and are thrilled at the idea of getting DAPL into the mainline. We went GA with our 1.2 release recently and have had our AMSO100 hardware and associated iWARP software in the hands of about 60 different sites - both HPTC and commerical.
Feel free to download the code and have a look. As Tom says it has been tested on kernels as far back as those for RH 7.3 and modern as kernel.org's 2.6.10. We have tested on both x86 and x86-64. As Tom says, we too (as well as our customers) are statisfied users of the DAPL interface. DAPL certainly continues to show that it works pretty well for us and is easier to use than the low level QP verbs layer. Recently an ISV moved a hunk of code from another interface (we do not know which) to our DAPL implementation in about 2.5 weeks. For the record, our kDAPL and uDAPL are dervived from the DAT reference code. Besides writing the Ammasso specific provider code, since IB != iWARP we did have to make some small changes to common code to handle iWARP specific difference. We are working with Tom, Arkady and the rest of the DAPL community to get the iWARP changes back into the base to help ensure that the DAPL interface is not considerred just an IB thing or that people come to the incorrect conclusion that IB verbs are ``good enough.'' For whatever its worth, we are actively working on not only being DAPL/iWARP >>compliant<< (working with UNH etc) but also >>compatible<< - going to plugfests and working with actual ISVs that have written linux code that rely on DAPL/iWARP -- i.e. not only do we pass the full uDAPL/kDAPL test suite, we have been working with a number of different large commerical vendors (who's source code we have never seen) to get their tests as well as their >>applications<< which were designed to run over DAPL. Since these codes had been previously only tested on IB (i.e we are the first shipping iWARP provider), we feel pretty good that our DAPL works as expected. Note: our plan is to increase the number of applications that use the code as quickly as possible; but under we are small start up and are band limited by the number of ISV we can work directly at one time. If you have specific questions, feel free to take them off line to me. Clem Cole Dist. Eng PS If you are interested in getting your hands on hardware, drop me a line and I'll make connection to our sales guys. -----Original Message----- From: Talpey, Thomas [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, March 03, 2005 9:47 AM To: [email protected] Cc: Clem Cole Subject: RE: [openib-general] putting in dead wood for DAPL and similarabomination At 02:22 PM 3/2/2005, Woodruff, Robert J wrote: >I think the point is that only one of those interconnects (IB) is >in the kernel, the rest are proprietary. Do any of the other RDMA >interconnect vendors plan to submit their code for inclusion into Linux >in the near future ? Yes - take a look at <http://www.ammasso.com/support.html> where you can freely download their complete stack, including drivers for their iWARP NIC, plus MPI and DAPL API libraries. It runs on 2.6.10 and many versions back (including 2.4.x). I'll let Clem speak for his plans to submit it, however. I'm just a satisfied user. Tom. _______________________________________________ openib-general mailing list [email protected] http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
