[Pvfs2-developers] Re: the halloween bug fixed
slang at mcs.anl.gov
Tue Oct 9 18:03:19 EDT 2007
On Oct 9, 2007, at 8:39 AM, Sam Lang wrote:
>> More generally, it bugs me that both core BMI and each method must
>> keep separate lists of addresses. It's probably time to expose the
>> data structure to BMI methods so we have just one list. But this is
>> certainly more than you set out to do.
> Yeah, but I agree its a mess. As we head down the path of multiple
> methods enabled though, it seems like we will want to allow an
> individual method to get at its own peer/connected addresses
> easily, without having to iterate through a list where another
> method has a bunch of addresses already.
> One alternative might be to throw out the address management (this
> reference list) in the bmi control layer, in favor of forcing
> methods to manage their own (since most of them do anyway), and
> instead of creating PVFS_BMI_addr_t values from
> id_gen_fast_register (a hash of the reference pointer), we could
> come up with a scheme that splits the 64bit value into a method
> type and an address value that the method returns. I think that
> would allow us to keep with the interface layering that we have
> now, although it would require some address management in the tcp
> method (and possibly others).
I went ahead and committed my patch, we can discuss how to
appropriately handle addresses in BMI, but for now the fix will have
to stand is a solution.
>> -- Pete
More information about the Pvfs2-developers