On Oct 9, 2007, at 8:39 AM, Sam Lang wrote:
More generally, it bugs me that both core BMI and each method must
keep separate lists of addresses. It's probably time to expose the
data structure to BMI methods so we have just one list. But this is
certainly more than you set out to do.
Yeah, but I agree its a mess. As we head down the path of multiple
methods enabled though, it seems like we will want to allow an
individual method to get at its own peer/connected addresses
easily, without having to iterate through a list where another
method has a bunch of addresses already.
One alternative might be to throw out the address management (this
reference list) in the bmi control layer, in favor of forcing
methods to manage their own (since most of them do anyway), and
instead of creating PVFS_BMI_addr_t values from
id_gen_fast_register (a hash of the reference pointer), we could
come up with a scheme that splits the 64bit value into a method
type and an address value that the method returns. I think that
would allow us to keep with the interface layering that we have
now, although it would require some address management in the tcp
method (and possibly others).
I went ahead and committed my patch, we can discuss how to
appropriately handle addresses in BMI, but for now the fix will have
to stand is a solution.
-sam
-sam
-- Pete
_______________________________________________
Pvfs2-developers mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.beowulf-underground.org/mailman/listinfo/pvfs2-developers
