From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Roland Dreier Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] RDMA/CMA: fix iWARP adapter TCP port space usage Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2010 15:08:20 -0700 Message-ID: References: <20100611124746.GA2292@CTUNG-MOBL1> <2EFBCAEF10980645BBCFB605689E08E904924CCE42@azsmsx506.amr.corp.intel.com> <4C12A6E8.5040400@opengridcomputing.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: In-Reply-To: <4C12A6E8.5040400-7bPotxP6k4+P2YhJcF5u+vpXobYPEAuW@public.gmane.org> (Steve Wise's message of "Fri, 11 Jun 2010 16:13:12 -0500") Sender: linux-rdma-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Steve Wise Cc: "Tung, Chien Tin" , "linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org" , "Waskiewicz Jr, Peter P" List-Id: linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org > You can peruse this thread from 2007: > > http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/8/15/174 > > In that thread David Miller said he would NAK this solution and even > NAK a solution where we expose the low level port allocation services > and allow RDMA/iWARP and TCP to share the port space. Thus I see no > way to resolve this issue with Dave's ACK, and maybe the RDMA > contributors and maintainers should move forward without it? If Dave Miller says this is an unacceptable thing to merge, then I'm not going to merge it over his explicit and unequivocal NAK. Trying sneak this in by hiding this patch on linux-rdma without cc-ing netdev is the wrong approach... the right approach is to get the hordes of users being hurt by this issue (if there are such hordes), make a big stink, and force a solution that everyone agrees on. - R. -- Roland Dreier || For corporate legal information go to: http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/index.html -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rdma" in the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html