I certainly won't shoot you - I agree. The other risk of the current FMRs is that people will think the "F" means "Fast".
Tom. At 08:32 PM 5/10/2006, Tom Tucker wrote: >On Wed, 2006-05-10 at 08:53 -0700, Roland Dreier wrote: >> Thomas> I am planning to test this some more in the next few >> Thomas> weeks, but what I'd really like to see is an IBTA >> Thomas> 1.2-compliant implementation, and one that operated on >> Thomas> work queue entries (not synchronous verbs). Is that being >> Thomas> worked on? >> >> No current hardware supports that as far as I know. (Well, ipath >> could fake it since they already implement all the verbs in software) >> > >I'm almost certain I'll be shot for saying this, but isn't there a >danger of confusion with real FMRs when the HW shows up? If the benefit >isn't there -- why do it if the application outcomes are almost >certainly all bad? _______________________________________________ openib-general mailing list [email protected] http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
