Hal, I may be confused - but I thought the spec said there was no valid response to a trap repress. I interpreted
"o14-3.a4: The SMA shall not send any message in response to a valid SubnTrapRepress() message" to mean that the SMA isn't allowed to respond with a BUSY status for a trap repress. -----Original Message----- From: Hal Rosenstock [mailto:hal.rosenst...@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 08, 2010 3:09 PM To: Hefty, Sean Cc: Mike Heinz; linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Handling busy responses from the SA On Tue, Jun 8, 2010 at 12:27 PM, Hefty, Sean <sean.he...@intel.com> wrote: >> Sean - remember that this patch will still return a BUSY status to the >> caller, if retries are exhausted and the last return code was BUSY, then >> that's what the caller will get. Thus, code which sets retries to zero will >> not be affected by this patch at all. > > It looks like it only returns the BUSY response if that matches with the last > retry, otherwise, the BUSY response is dropped. It also looks like it > applies to all MADs, including vendor specific ones, and not just those from > the SA. Per the proposed patch, it currently includes trap represses (as determined by ib_response_mad). Shouldn't busy be ignored for that case ? I don't think that would be used but it seems safer to me. -- Hal > > - Sean > N�����r��y����b�X��ǧv�^�){.n�+����{��ٚ�{ay� ʇڙ�,j��f���h���z� �w��� ���j:+v���w�j�m��������zZ+�����ݢj"��!�i
