On Fri, Mar 6, 2009 at 3:41 PM, Sasha Khapyorsky <[email protected]> wrote: > On 12:55 Fri 06 Mar , Hal Rosenstock wrote: >> >> It could be subsequent patch but thought it best to include it. Do you >> want this separate ? > > Without clear usage case I would prefer to not have it at all - finally > it is on a fast path.
It's the same as what is done in the kernel for MAD response but I removed it because I could see you were against this. >> >> > BR is not used anywhere in OpenSM. >> >> No, but someone might use ib_types.h to build BM. > > We cannot know what will be needed then - this someone will need to care > anyway. You could say that about a lot of things accepted which aren't fully integrated. >> > And this function which should process TrapRepress method does nothing, >> > right? >> >> Just some validation; It doesn't need to do anything (just retire the >> transaction). > > Then I don't understand - how is trap 144 repress handled? And why > those changes in trap_rcv_process_response() were needed? Perhaps it's being overly pendantic. I can revise the patch to not have the repress get this far. -- Hal > Sasha > _______________________________________________ general mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openfabrics.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/general To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
