From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Hal Rosenstock Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/7] libibumad: Provide MAD definitions with libibumad Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2013 11:39:53 -0500 Message-ID: <5124FC59.2070602@dev.mellanox.co.il> References: <1359409135-559-1-git-send-email-sean.hefty@intel.com> <5124F212.2060503@dev.mellanox.co.il> <1828884A29C6694DAF28B7E6B8A823736F34E958@ORSMSX101.amr.corp.intel.com> <1828884A29C6694DAF28B7E6B8A823736F34E976@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: <1828884A29C6694DAF28B7E6B8A823736F34E976-P5GAC/sN6hmkrb+BlOpmy7fspsVTdybXVpNB7YpNyf8@public.gmane.org> Sender: linux-rdma-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: "Hefty, Sean" Cc: "linux-rdma-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org" , "alexne-VPRAkNaXOzVWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org" List-Id: linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org On 2/20/2013 11:29 AM, Hefty, Sean wrote: >> I need to check the kernel code, but I believe that the RMPP header is exposed. > > I looked at copy_recv_mad(), and it copies the entire 256-byte MAD to user space, which includes any RMPP header, followed by any additional segmented data. So most of the RMPP definitions are relevant, the exceptions possibly being UMAD_RMPP_TYPE_[ACK | STOP | ABORT]. IMO - I would keep those for completeness. Yes but how much of header is relevant when it's a multipacket RMPP MAD message ? My concern is that it may be confusing as to validity/use of certain RMPP fields, etc. -- Hal > - Sean > -- 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