Re: linux rdma 3.14 merge plans

Roland Dreier
2014-01-18T21:42:37Z

On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 1:14 PM, Nicholas A. Bellinger
<nab-IzHhD5pYlfBP7FQvKIMDCQ@public.gmane.org> wrote:
> I've reviewed the API from the perspective of what's required for
> implementing protection support in iser, and currently don't have any
> recommendations or objections beyond what has been proposed by Sagi & Co
> in PATCH-v4 code.

I guess I'm a little confused about why we need verbs support for this
to implement DIF/DIX in iser. Isn't the whole point of protection to
have end-to-end checksums, rather than having checksums computed by
the transport after there's a chance for corruption?

- R.