Re: [PATCH rdma-next 0/3] Support out of order data placement

Jason Gunthorpe
2017-06-13T19:17:04Z

On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 09:30:05PM -0400, Tom Talpey wrote:
> >>Again, I'd be a lot less concerned if non-strict were the default, and strict
> >>mode was negotiated. It's all just so upside-down.
> >
> >In IB spec, in-order delivery is default.
>
> I don't agree. Requests are sent in-order, and the responder
> processes them in-order, but the bytes thenselves are not
> guaranteed to appear in-order. Additionally, if retries occur,
> this is most definitely not the case.

+1

And again, if message ordering and table 79 are unchanged in this new
mode it is still fully conformant to the IBTA (and again, I don't see
how the transmitter can change behavior and not break table 79)

Jason