[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Sean Hefty wrote:
>> Add support for transport specific extensions to the ib_device verbs.
>> Relocate process_mad as an IB specific verb.
>>
>> This provides a mechanism to add iWarp specific functionality, such
>> as the iWarp CM calls, to ib_device.
>
> Third proposal from Fab:
>
> struct rdma_device {
> most everything
> };
>
> struct ib_device {
> struct rdma_device dev;
> IB specific operations;
> };
>
> Of course, this is a much larger change.
>
When I first looked at making ib_verbs.h iWARP friendly
that was one of my preferred long term solutions, but I
was worried about the impact of such a global reference
restructuring.
It's nice, but do we really want to edit that many files
all at once? And if we do, should it wait until after 1.0?
_______________________________________________
openib-general mailing list
[email protected]
http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
