[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Tom Tucker wrote: >>> Its OK to call rdma_reject on active side as well, isn't it? >> >> You'll get -EINVAL on iWARP if you do this.... > > For IB, rdma_reject can be called on the active side if the > user is managing their own QP states, or is SDP. How does iWarp > support userspace QPs? >
The assumption is that the connection is established if the passive side indicated to proceed knowing what the active side requested. That doesn't mean that it was a take it or leave it. The passive side's response could still have reduced the requested resource reservations. But if the active side does not like it, the only real recourse is to break the connection. IT-API has some good abstractions and write-ups on two-step vs. three-step private data exchanges in connection setup. The bottom line is that two-way is portable, three-way is InfiniBand specific. My assumption has been that an application that truly required three-way exchanges is probably doing something very specific with IB resources, and hence would use IB-specific connection setup. I'm not following your question about iWARP support for user mode QPs. The caller (user or kernel) supplies the QP and what they want done. The only real difference is what the resources behind a "connection request" are. With iWARP there is an actual TCP connection by the time the private data has been collected (from the MPA Request frame). _______________________________________________ openib-general mailing list [email protected] http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
