[rds-devel] future/20081031

[Or Gerlitz]

Andy Grover wrote:
> Features:
> * IB and iWARP are separate modular transports
>
>
> So please take a look. Let's not worry about the massive code duplication I've just introduced for now
Hi Andy,

May I ask what is the reasoning beyond this IB/iWARP code separation 
which as you say resulted in massive code duplication?

So far other ULPs which support both (e.g open-MPI, rNFS, Lustre and 
soon iSer) use the same rdma transport code for both IB and iWARP with 
some internal minor branching in the code based on the differences 
between the two. Moving forward I believe this can create maintainship / 
support headache... also probably be a show stopper for mainline inclusion.

I understand the possible frustration in Oracle resulted from the iwarp 
patches breaking the IB code, a possible way to solve this in the future 
is conducting extensive review along with some testing of proposed 
patches (specifically by the submitter and the maintainer...)

Also, adding an "RDS:" prefix to the change-log subject line of patches 
would be very much helpful to distinguish RDS from non-RDS ones when 
examining the git patch log ...

Or.