1. Don't worry about checking. There's nothing too evil a CM user can do with a QP beyond getting another QP to connect to it, since the CM user can't modify a QP unless it legitimately owns it. And an evil user can always guess the QPN instead of the QP handle anyway.
2. Change the CM API so that it just takes the QPN, QP type, SRQ status and device directly rather than reading it out of the QP. This lets the userspace CM just get the info from userspace without needing to look at the QP at all. Of course it does raise the issue of how userspace should specify the device.
3. Merge the userspace CM into userspace verbs support so they use the same context. Ugh.
Personally I would lean slightly towards #2, since it feels to me like even the kernel CM API would be cleaner that way. However I don't have a good answer for how userspace should specify which device to use.
Which of these options is being used? It seems like option #2 would work as long as there's a way to locate a device based on a GID.
- Sean _______________________________________________ openib-general mailing list [email protected] http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
