From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Sasha Khapyorsky Subject: Re: [PATCH] opensm/osm_vendor_ibumad: Use OSM_UMAD_MAX_AGENTS rather than UMAD_CA_MAX_AGENTS Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2009 15:35:43 +0200 Message-ID: <20091022133543.GJ20210@me> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-rdma-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Hal Rosenstock Cc: sean.hefty-ral2JQCrhuEAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org, stan.smith-ral2JQCrhuEAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org, linux-rdma-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-Id: linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org On 08:49 Thu 22 Oct , Hal Rosenstock wrote: > >> =A0/****s* OpenSM: Vendor UMAD/osm_ca_info_t > >> =A0* NAME > >> =A0* =A0 osm_ca_info_t > >> @@ -154,7 +156,7 @@ typedef struct _osm_vendor { > >> =A0 =A0 =A0 osm_ca_info_t *p_ca_info; > >> =A0 =A0 =A0 uint32_t timeout; > >> =A0 =A0 =A0 int max_retries; > >> - =A0 =A0 osm_bind_handle_t agents[UMAD_CA_MAX_AGENTS]; > >> + =A0 =A0 osm_bind_handle_t agents[OSM_UMAD_MAX_AGENTS]; > > > > Any reason? >=20 > To make the umad vendor layer "stand on its own". This was discussed > in the Windows porting issues. See thread which ends > http://lists.openfabrics.org/pipermail/ofw/2009-October/005819.html I (and guess that many other OpenSM source and change log readers) am not subscribed on ofw list and unaware about this discussion. Could you summarize (in the patch change log) what is going on there and what is motivation for this change? Sasha -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rdma" i= n the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html