Roland Dreier wrote:
Sean> Does the problem go away if we require users to poll for all Sean> CQ events after destroying a QP, but before destroying a CQ?I don't see how an app could do this. It doesn't know how many CQ events it needs to retrieve, and there could be arbitrarily many events from other CQs to retrieve first.
The intent is that after all QPs on a CQ are destroyed and all events are removed, then no new completion events could ever occur on that CQ. Destroying the CQ at this point should now be safe.
However, this is essentially the same as Michael's scheme, which I implemented. The app destroys the CQ and then retrieves events until it gets the "dead CQ" event.
It's not quite the same. With a destroy event scheme, a call is made to destroy the CQ, but completion events could still be oustanding. I'm proposing delaying the call to destroy the CQ until no more completion events are possible.
- 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
