On Mon, Jun 09, 2014 at 05:08:09PM -0700, PJ Waskiewicz wrote: > > > The patch set you refer to tried to _unify_ the port space and was > > > rejected. The only other alternative is to pick ephemeral ports and > > > maintain a mapping for RDMA services. > > > > I thought both approaches were tried in kernel and NAK'd by > > netdev? This looks very similar to the 2010 patchset, except the > > dummy socket allocation is living in userspace in this version. > > This was something I presented and discussed at NetConf 2011 with > David and other netdev core folks: > http://vger.kernel.org/netconf2011.html. The main issue David had > with the original approach was the socket was being consumed by > something else inside the kernel. It circumvented the TCP socket > allocation/reservation code, which was frowned upon. If you have/can get agreement from netdev that this is acceptable then I think it is OK from the RDMA side. It would be a good touch to CC the netdev list with the cover letter describing this mechanism properly, maybe referencing this discussion just so there are no surprises. BTW, you can purge my jgg@xxxxxxxxxx email from your address book, that hasn't worked in over 10 years.. Jason -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rdma" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
