Re: [openib-general] Re: RFC: ipath ioctls and their replacements

From: Sean Hefty <mshefty@ichips.intel.com>
To: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>
Cc: "Bryan O'Sullivan" <bos@pathscale.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <greg@kroah.com>,
	Roland Dreier <rdreier@cisco.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, openib-general@openib.org,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>
Subject: Re: [openib-general] Re: RFC: ipath ioctls and their replacements
Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 10:50:07 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <43CFDF5F.5060409@ichips.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <m1hd80oz9b.fsf@ebiederm.dsl.xmission.com>

Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>>No.  If you're running a full IB stack, we provide the usual IB subnet
>>management facilities, and you can run OpenSM to manage your subnet.  If
>>you're *not*, which is the case I'm concerned with here, it makes no
>>sense to replicate the byzantine IB management interfaces in order to do
>>a handful of simple things that aren't even tied to the higher-level IB
>>protocols.
> 
> Is it the stack that is byzantine?  Or the interface too it.
> What I thinking untimately is there should be something about as
> simple as af_packet in the kernel (but at the IB/rdma) layer that
> gives you the help you need.

I'm not familiar with the driver, but would the lower level verbs interfaces 
work for this?  Could you just post whatever datagrams that you want directly to 
your management QPs?

- Sean