From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Hal Rosenstock Subject: Re: [PATCH] libibmad: Support for Mellanox vendor specific ExtendedPortInfo SM class MAD Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2011 14:48:58 -0400 Message-ID: <4E1F3A1A.2020103@dev.mellanox.co.il> References: <4E1F3419.3010508@dev.mellanox.co.il> <1828884A29C6694DAF28B7E6B8A8237302E197@ORSMSX101.amr.corp.intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1828884A29C6694DAF28B7E6B8A8237302E197-P5GAC/sN6hmkrb+BlOpmy7fspsVTdybXVpNB7YpNyf8@public.gmane.org> Sender: linux-rdma-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: "Hefty, Sean" Cc: Ira Weiny , Liran Liss , "linux-rdma-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org" List-Id: linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org On 7/14/2011 2:34 PM, Hefty, Sean wrote: >> - IB_ATTR_LAST >> + IB_ATTR_LAST, >> + >> + IB_ATTR_MLNX_EXT_PORT_INFO = 0xff90, >> }; > > Seems kind of odd to have something come after 'last'.. I'm not sure why IB_ATTR_LAST is even there (similarly for IB_SA_ATTR_LAST); maybe a historical vestige at this point but due to backward compatibility (who knows if it's used) should remain. It's a poor name given vendor SM attribute IDs. I didn't think it was safe to have IB_ATTR_LAST increase from 0x21 to 0xff91 because of this so I thought it best to add it as I did and treat this new attribute ID as an exception if needed which it isn't currently. -- Hal -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rdma" in the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html