Quoting r. Sean Hefty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Subject: Re: RFC: cma: need rdma_unbind > > Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > >Hmm. As I see it, keeping the QP alive for a given timeout after user > >requested > >close is a simple way to implement graceful close, not limited to sockets. > >On the other hand, we need to free the port immediately. > > This seems to imply that there's another connection abstraction on top of > the CMA.
Well, that's what ULPs are. > From the perspective of the CMA, the connection, and hence port, is still > in use. No. A socket is a 5 tuple (proto, local addr, local port, remote addr, remote port). unbind just says that you can reuse local addresses, so e.g. a new connection request will connect to a new socket. > For example, I don't think that rdma_unbind() could work if the > underlying device were iWarp, or something that used the port number when > mapping data. The 5 tuple still must be unique, so no problem I think. > I also can't think of a better solution to this problem. Maybe rename it unbind_local? -- 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
