Open MPI logo

Open MPI Development Mailing List Archives

  |   Home   |   Support   |   FAQ   |   all Development mailing list

From: Steve Wise (swise_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-05-09 17:56:46

On Wed, 2007-05-09 at 17:46 -0700, Andrew Friedley wrote:
> > Therefore, the only truly safe thing for an iWARP btl to do (or a
> > udapl btl since that is also an iWARP btl) is to have the active
> > layer send an MPI Layer "nop" of some kind immediately after
> > establishing the connection if there is nothing else to send.
> This is fine for an iWARP/RDMACM/whatever BTL (or anything else that
> uses the OFA verbs interface(s)), but my argument is that uDAPL is NOT
> specifically there to support just iWARP (though it may include it), and
> that OFED's uDAPL should be adjusted to handle this. Again, uDAPL is a
> network *independent* abstraction, so requiring network-dependent
> behavior from the uDAPL consumer is wrong.
> A related question -- how does this 'connection initiator must send
> first' requirement relate to UD?

It doesn't. UD isn't supported in IWARP.