On Mon, 2005-04-11 at 14:47, Sean Hefty wrote: > Hal Rosenstock wrote: > >>>2. Should ib_create_cm_id check return an error if cm_handler == NULL > >>>just to make sure ? > >> > >>Personally, I don't think it's worth this check for kernel clients, > >>unless we want to start checking for NULL parameters everywhere. > > > > Incoming REQs currently use this capability anyhow. > > Incoming REQs use the cm_handler associated with the listen request.
Right, but the CM ID is initially created with the NULL handler. That's all I was saying... > > It looks like sending private data in REQ/REP/RTU, but incoming private > > data > > isn't handled on the receiving side. > > The private_data is given to the user in the cm_event structure. Look > for work->cm_event.private_data = in cm_format_req_event, > cm_format_rep_event, and cm_rtu_handler. Note that the private_data is > only available while in the CM event callback. Got it. Thanks. > > Also, in cm_process_send_error(), where the handler is called > > > > cm_id_priv->id.cm_handler(&cm_id_priv->id, &cm_event); > > > > might that callback request the CM ID destruction ? If so, some > > code is missing to handle this. > > Yep - this is a bug. Send errors should probably be handled using the > same cm_process_work routine that the receive handling goes through. > I'll generate a patch for this, but it'll take me a few days, unless > this is urgent. Nope; not urgent. Just stumbled across it while looking through things. -- Hal _______________________________________________ openib-general mailing list [email protected] http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
