On Wed, 2015-06-10 at 06:30 +0000, Liran Liss wrote: > > From: Ira Weiny <ira.we...@intel.com> > > Hi Ira, > > OPA cannot impersonate IB; OPA node and link types have to be designated as > such. > In terms of MAD processing flows, both explicit (as in the handle_opa_smi() > call below) and implicit code paths (which share IB flows - there are several > cases) must make this distinction.
As far as in the kernel is concerned, the individual capability bits are much more important. I would actually like to do away with the node_type variable from struct ib_device eventually. As for user space, where we have to maintain ABI, node_type can be IB_CA (after all, the OPA devices are just like RoCE devices in that they implement IB VERBS as their user visible transport, and only addressing/management is different from link layer IB devices), link layer needs to be OPA. > > +static enum smi_action > > +handle_opa_smi(struct ib_mad_port_private *port_priv, > > + struct ib_mad_qp_info *qp_info, > > + struct ib_wc *wc, > > + int port_num, > > + struct ib_mad_private *recv, > > + struct ib_mad_private *response) > > +{ > ... > > + } else if (port_priv->device->node_type == RDMA_NODE_IB_SWITCH) <---- > > --Liran -- Doug Ledford <dledf...@redhat.com> GPG KeyID: 0E572FDD
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part