All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ulrich Drepper <drepper@redhat.com>
To: Fab Tillier <ftillier@infiniconsys.com>
Cc: "Woodruff, Robert J" <woody@co.intel.com>,
	"Woodruff, Robert J" <woody@jf.intel.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, "Hefty,
	Sean" <sean.hefty@intel.com>,
	"Coffman, Jerrie L" <jerrie.l.coffman@intel.com>,
	"Davis, Arlin R" <arlin.r.davis@intel.com>
Subject: Re: PATCH - InfiniBand Access Layer (IBAL)
Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2004 12:20:35 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <405B5613.9080301@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <08628CA53C6CBA4ABAFB9E808A5214CB017C1A7A@mercury.infiniconsys.com>


> For the IBAL stack, there are numerous documents on the Linux InfiniBand
> Project (http://infiniband.sourceforge.net/) describing most everything from
> the overall architecture to the APIs.

That's not the same, and it incidentally shows a problem in what you do.

First, the working group I refer to is this:

  http://www.opengroup.org/icsc/

Dave Edmondson from Sun gave a presentation at the Austin group meeting
(in 2002, not 2001 as I said before) which you can see here:

  http://www.opengroup.org/austin/docs/austin_105.pdf


This is the information I cannot get to.  Now why would I want that
instead of what you do?

First of all, these are the extensions to the existing interfaces.
These extensions not only influence existing code, but the extensions
can also be useful for non-interconnect usage.  That is, if we can adopt
them if necessary.  Many of the interconnect problems also are present
in Gig and 10Gig ethernet.  The ICSC refused to give anyone outside
their group access to the document despite the fact that they want to
have the extensions added to POSIX.  If we develop separate extensions
they will collide and/or cause unnecessary duplication of code and effort.


Now, why is ICSC relevant?  In my opinion, and I'm not really that
knowledgeable about all these networking issues but I know a thing or
two about APIs, going down the road with Infiniband specific APIs is
bad.  Why would we want to have separate APIs for other interconnect
fibers?  The ICSC, according to my understanding, tries to unify the
APIs to be usable not only by Infiniband.  This is IMO highly desirable.

You can get a glimpse of what they are doing by looking at the documents
referenced in

  http://www.opengroup.org/icsc/

But that's all there is.  The socket extension working group

  http://www.opengroup.org/icsc/sockets/

only has some meeting minutes available.

-- 
➧ Ulrich Drepper ➧ Red Hat, Inc. ➧ 444 Castro St ➧ Mountain View, CA ❖

  reply	other threads:[~2004-03-19 20:21 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 41+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2004-03-15 22:52 PATCH - InfiniBand Access Layer (IBAL) Woodruff, Robert J
2004-03-15 23:17 ` Christoph Hellwig
2004-03-15 23:44   ` Johannes Erdfelt
2004-03-15 23:48     ` Christoph Hellwig
2004-03-15 23:54       ` Johannes Erdfelt
2004-03-16  0:09         ` Christoph Hellwig
2004-03-16  0:18           ` Johannes Erdfelt
2004-03-16  1:41 ` Roland Dreier
2004-03-19 18:47 ` Ulrich Drepper
2004-03-19 19:21   ` Fab Tillier
2004-03-19 20:20     ` Ulrich Drepper [this message]
2004-03-19 20:47   ` Roland Dreier
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2004-03-20 19:15 Acker, Dave
2004-03-20 17:15 Acker, Dave
2004-03-20 17:55 ` Ulrich Drepper
2004-03-21 22:16   ` Roland Dreier
2004-03-14 23:14 Nivedita Singhvi
2004-03-14  3:46 Woodruff, Robert J
2004-03-15  2:10 ` Greg KH
2004-03-13 22:07 Woodruff, Robert J
2004-03-14  1:13 ` Andrew Morton
2004-03-14  2:28 ` Greg KH
2004-02-24 23:02 Woodruff, Robert J
2004-02-25  3:32 ` Rik van Riel
2004-02-24 22:18 Woodruff, Robert J
2004-02-24 21:33 Woodruff, Robert J
2004-02-24 19:29 Woodruff, Robert J
2004-02-24 19:44 ` Greg KH
2004-02-24 19:50   ` Christoph Hellwig
2004-02-24 19:57     ` Greg KH
2004-02-24 22:29       ` Rik van Riel
2004-02-25  0:28         ` Matti Aarnio
2004-02-25  3:39           ` Rik van Riel
2004-02-25 16:25             ` Timothy Miller
2004-02-25 17:34               ` Roland Dreier
2004-02-25 18:55               ` Sam Ravnborg
2004-02-25 18:05                 ` Linus Torvalds
2004-02-25 19:09                   ` Timothy Miller
2004-02-25 19:55                   ` Sam Ravnborg
2004-02-25 19:05                     ` Linus Torvalds
2004-02-25 13:19           ` Christoph Hellwig

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=405B5613.9080301@redhat.com \
    --to=drepper@redhat.com \
    --cc=arlin.r.davis@intel.com \
    --cc=ftillier@infiniconsys.com \
    --cc=jerrie.l.coffman@intel.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=sean.hefty@intel.com \
    --cc=woody@co.intel.com \
    --cc=woody@jf.intel.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.