[Pvfs2-developers] Re: the halloween bug fixed

[Sam Lang]

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.
-sam


> -sam
>
>>
>> 		-- Pete
>>
>