From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Sean Hefty Subject: Re: [ofa-general] Re: [PATCH RFC] RDMA/CMA: Allocate PS_TCP ports from the host TCP port space. Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2007 14:01:07 -0700 Message-ID: <470D3D93.2020606@ichips.intel.com> References: <46B883B5.8040702@opengridcomputing.com> <46BB61D0.4090101@opengridcomputing.com> <46BB89C0.4040303@ichips.intel.com> <20070809.145534.102938208.davem@davemloft.net> <470AA729.2050009@opengridcomputing.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, rdreier@cisco.com, David Miller , general@lists.openfabrics.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org To: Steve Wise Return-path: In-Reply-To: <470AA729.2050009@opengridcomputing.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: general-bounces@lists.openfabrics.org Errors-To: general-bounces@lists.openfabrics.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org > The hack to use a socket and bind it to claim the port was just for > demostrating the idea. The correct solution, IMO, is to enhance the > core low level 4-tuple allocation services to be more generic (eg: not > be tied to a struct sock). Then the host tcp stack and the host rdma > stack can allocate TCP/iWARP ports/4tuples from this common exported > service and share the port space. This allocation service could also be > used by other deep adapters like iscsi adapters if needed. Since iWarp runs on top of TCP, the port space is really the same. FWIW, I agree that this proposal is the correct solution to support iWarp. - Sean