> On 1/15/2015 6:30 PM, Weiny, Ira wrote: > >> > >> On 1/12/2015 12:11 PM, ira.we...@intel.com wrote: > >>> From: Ira Weiny <ira.we...@intel.com> > >>> > >>> OPA_MIN_CLASS_VERSION -- OPA Class versions are > 0x80 > >>> OPA_SMP_CLASS_VERSION -- Defined at 0x80 > OPA_MGMT_BASE_VERSION -- > >>> Defined at 0x80 > >>> > >>> Increase max management version to accommodate OPA > >> > >> Allocation of MAD base and class version numbers is owned by the IBTA. > >> It doesn't seem appropriate to arbitrarily claim code points without > >> proper approval. > > > > OPA is its own architecture space. While this space uses some of the > > same values as IB we are not claiming any IBTA values. > > You *are* claiming IBTA values. When the IBTA chooses to use those values, > then there will be a conflict.
There is no conflict. It is true that when the IBTA assigns meaning to those values the code may have to be changed to interpret this new meaning. That has to happen regardless of these patches or their meaning on OPA devices. Ira -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rdma" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
