Quoting r. Libor Michalek [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Subject: Re: SDP_CONN_LOCK
On Thu, Feb 17, 2005 at 05:35:17PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
Hi, Libor!
Could you please explain what are the SDP_CONN_LOCK
and friends doing in SDP?
It seems they just implement exclusive access to
SDP_CONN_PUT was called before SDP_CONN_UNLOCK.
If this is the last reference, the connection could be removed
and an attempt to unlock would crash.
Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Index: sdp_inet.c
===
---
sdp_inet.c, inside _sdp_inet_listen, we have:
#if 0 /* BUG 2034 workaround. */
conn-backlog_max = backlog;
#else
conn-backlog_max = 1024;
#endif
What gives? what would be the proper fix as opposed to a work-around?
--
MST - Michael S. Tsirkin
Hello,
In an effort to improve our customer service and the speed with which we answer
your e-mails, we have created a new web-based contact system on the neopets.com
site, which is located at http://www.neopets.com/contact.phtml . From this new
Contact Us page, you are able to send abuse
Shirley, can you read Documentation/SubmittingPatches, and if the
declaration in that file applies, resend your patches with a
Signed-off-by: line?
Thanks,
Roland
___
openib-general mailing list
openib-general@openib.org
Michael Since device_cap_flags is a set of ORed values, make the
Michael result unsigned. Also to be in line with other flags.
This doesn't seem to make any practical difference, since the largest
device cap flag is 115, and even if it were 131 we never do any
non-bitwise arithmetic so
Quoting r. Michael S. Tsirkin [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Subject: [PATCH] initialize device_cap_flags in mthca
device_cap_flags are uninitialized in mthca.
Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
This was reporting the RQ_SIG capability which is now gone.
Here's an update.
Index:
This patch adds initial support for handling CM reject messages. It
should work with the following reject codes: 1-3, 5, 8-9, 11-23,
26-29, 32-33. (These are basically rejections by the remote consumer,
versus by the remote CM.)
I still need to determine the proper handling for the reject codes
Quoting r. Roland Dreier [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Subject: ANNOUNCE: First usable version of userspace verbs
I'm happy to announce the initial availability of userspace verbs
support for brave testers.
To try this out, check out the roland-uverbs subversion branch:
svn co
Michael Would you like help with (2)? Specifically, how should
Michael are backport patches split up? I guess per file? Still,
Michael it seems unlikely they can be made independent, right?
No thanks, I think I can handle it. I'm planning on making the
patches independent and
On Sun, Feb 20, 2005 at 10:07:43AM -0800, Tom Duffy wrote:
On Sun, 2005-02-20 at 02:05 +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
I think we also should replace __inline__ with inline everywhere.
Also, I think the convention is to add __ before inline functions
if they are an implementation
Quoting r. Roland Dreier [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Subject: Re: [PATCH] 1/2 separate locking for send and receive q in mthca
Michael Instead of doing this, how about something else I would
Michael prefer: we could avoid locking the QP on CQ poll
Michael altogether, if there is a
Quoting r. Tom Duffy [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Subject: Re: [openib-general] Re: Re: [PATCH][SDP][14/22] Whitespace clean up
in sdp_proto.h
On Tue, 2005-02-22 at 22:32 +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
Good. By the way, do you plan to keep the convention of writing
0 == foo?
I personally
Quoting r. Roland Dreier [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Subject: [PATCH] Rename debug_level to ipoib_debug_level
This renames the variable debug_level to ipoib_debug_level in the
IPoIB module to avoid name clashes if IPoIB is built into the kernel.
SDP has the same variable name so this fixes
Quoting r. Michael S. Tsirkin [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Subject: Re: Re: Re: [PATCH][SDP][14/22] Whitespace clean up in sdp_proto.h
Quoting r. Tom Duffy [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Subject: Re: [openib-general] Re: Re: [PATCH][SDP][14/22] Whitespace clean
up in sdp_proto.h
On Tue, 2005-02-22 at
On Sun, Feb 20, 2005 at 02:45:15PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
Hi!
sdp_advt seems to re-implement linked list.
Why is not the standard linked list used?
There is some redundancy between the different lists even within
the sdp code base. There are three objects, iocb, buff, and advt
On Mon, Feb 21, 2005 at 08:12:57PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
Quoting r. Libor Michalek [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Thu, Feb 17, 2005 at 04:03:59PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
Quoting r. Libor Michalek [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Possible Issues
- Memory locking for AIO requires a
On Tue, Feb 22, 2005 at 12:57:00PM -0800, Tom Duffy wrote:
On Tue, 2005-02-22 at 12:20 -0800, Libor Michalek wrote:
Thanks Tom, I've applied and commited the patches.
Did you choose not to apply these changes, or was this a simple
oversight?
Yup, it was an oversight. I had to hand
Speaking of missing patches, I still see a lot of warnings from SDP on
64-bit archs because of %ll printk formats being used to print u64
values inside of sdp_debug_data statements. Is there a patch floating
around for this or do you want me to write one?
- R.
The following patch adds reject handling for reject code 4, timeout.
The update requires searching for the local cm_id based on the remote
CA GUID and remote communication ID.
Signed-off-by: Sean Hefty [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Index: infiniband/core/cm.c
On Mon, Feb 21, 2005 at 03:32:00PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
Some extern (non-static) variables did not start with sdp_ or anything
like that. Here's a fix.
Thanks, applied and commited. I did change a few lines to keep them
under 80 columns wide.
-Libor
Hal,
On Thu, 2005-02-17 at 13:12, Hal Rosenstock wrote:
Hi Nitin,
On Wed, 2005-02-16 at 17:33, Nitin Hande wrote:
On Wed, 2005-02-16 at 13:26, Hal Rosenstock wrote:
On Wed, 2005-02-16 at 16:08, Nitin Hande wrote:
Hal,
[snip..]
[snip...]
Before the patch the
22 matches
Mail list logo
