Quoting r. Steve Wise <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Subject: Re: PATCH] enhancement to rdma_bw and rdma_lat to utilize the RDMA CM > > On Tue, 2006-05-16 at 17:41 +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > Quoting r. Steve Wise <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > Subject: PATCH] enhancement to rdma_bw and rdma_lat to utilize the RDMA CM > > > > > > I don't know who maintains src/userspace/perftest, but here is a patch > > > set that enables rdma_bw and rdma_lat to use the RDMA_CM with the > > > addition of the -c or --cma flag. > > > > > > > I'm worried that this makes the program too big. Maybe this should be > > another test rather than an option? > > > > ok. You want it as a separate pair of programs?
I guess we'll see once there's the minimum patch that only affects the connection setup. If the changes can be localised to just the pp routines, then I think it still fits as part of the same test. > > > The rkey/addr info is exchanged in the private data, and SEND/RECV's are > > > used > > > to sync the client/server before and after execution. > > > > Do we really need SEND/RECV messages for this? > > I think I get completion with error once the remote side has disconnected. > > No? > > > > perhaps. I just thought it was cleaner to synch up at the end. Just > like the non-cma version does over the TCP socket (see > pp_client_exch_dest() / pp_server_exch_dest() at the end of the test). Yes, using pp_client_exch_dest/pp_server_exch_dest now looks like not a good idea. Need to think back to why do we need this at all. -- 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
