On Fri, 2007-01-12 at 14:38, Sean Hefty wrote:
> Hal Rosenstock wrote:
> >>+enum {
> >>+ IB_SA_SM_TRAP_GID_IN_SERVICE = 64,
> >>+ IB_SA_SM_TRAP_GID_OUT_OF_SERVICE = 65,
> >>+ IB_SA_SM_TRAP_CREATE_MC_GROUP = 66,
> >>+ IB_SA_SM_TRAP_DELETE_MC_GROUP = 67,
> >>+ IB_SA_SM_TRAP_PORT_CHANGE_STATE = 128,
> >>+ IB_SA_SM_TRAP_LINK_INTEGRITY = 129,
> >>+ IB_SA_SM_TRAP_EXCESSIVE_BUFFER_OVERRUN = 130,
> >>+ IB_SA_SM_TRAP_FLOW_CONTROL_UPDATE_EXPIRED = 131,
> >
> >
> > Why not 144 and 145 too ?
>
> I was just trying to setup the framework first. Adding new traps isn't overly
> difficult, but I would need to define appropriate data details as well.
>
> >
> >>+ IB_SA_SM_TRAP_BAD_M_KEY = 256,
> >>+ IB_SA_SM_TRAP_BAD_P_KEY = 257,
> >>+ IB_SA_SM_TRAP_BAD_Q_KEY = 258,
> >
> >
> > What about 259 ?
>
> Same as above.
Aren't those all in the spec ?
> > Component mask is meaningless for InformInfo so these shouldn't be
> > needed.
>
> That's a good point. These should be removed. (I had defined them before I
> realized component mask was ignored for InformInfo.)
Yes, thanks.
-- Hal
> - Sean
_______________________________________________
openib-general mailing list
[email protected]
http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
