> Hi Ram,
> I apologize for the delay in responding.
>
> The Linux XRC implementation does not provide XRC specific errors.
> Rather, these errors are perceived as local access violation errors at
> the responder. Consequently, at the responder side, for both XRCETH and
> XRC domain violation errors, a local access violation asynchronous
> error is reported (IB_EVENT_QP_ACCESS_ERR). The remote QP then
> transitions to the ERR state.
>
> At the requester side, these errors are perceived as Remote Invalid
> Request errors, and generate IB_WC_REM_INV_REQ_ERR completions. The
> local QP then transitions to the ERR state.
>
> Operationally, then, the resources behave as they should upon XRC
> errors.
>
> On the responder side, XRC receive completions report the XRC_TGT_QP in
> the “qp” field of the ib_wc structure; the XRC SRQ number is returned
> in field “src_qpn”.
>
> (The src_qp field was previously used only for UD qps; there was no
> reason not to use it to return the XRC SRQ number, especially as doing
> this meant no need to add a new field to struct ib_wc).
>
> -Jack
>
OK. We'll implement in the same manner.
Thanks,
Ram
��.n��������+%������w��{.n�����{���fk��ܨ}���Ơz�j:+v�����w����ޙ��&�)ߡ�a����z�ޗ���ݢj��w�f
