Quoting Sean Hefty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > Maybe rdma_connection (these things encapsulate connectin state)? > > Or, rdma_sock or rdma_socket, since people are used to the fact that > > connections > > are sockets? > > Any objection to rdma_socket?
Fine with me, this makes the intent of bind/listen explicit. > >>>>+int rdma_resolve_route(struct rdma_id *id, int timeout_ms); > > > > I was trying to say, why doesnt rdma_connect just do this > > transparently? Why do we need a separate call? > > Eventually rdma_connect will call this for the user if a route hasn't been > resolved. At some point though, the API will likely need to be expanded to > specify some sort of quality of service. I thought that would also happen at connect time. No? -- 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
