From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Hal Rosenstock Subject: Re: [PATCH opensm] Change LFT event to be per block/per switch rather than just per switch Date: Thu, 04 Apr 2013 14:46:42 -0400 Message-ID: <515DCA92.9030800@dev.mellanox.co.il> References: <515D5FA5.1000809@dev.mellanox.co.il> <2807E5FD2F6FDA4886F6618EAC48510E0156FCEF@CRSMSX102.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: <2807E5FD2F6FDA4886F6618EAC48510E0156FCEF-8k97q/ur5Z1cIJlls4ac1rfspsVTdybXVpNB7YpNyf8@public.gmane.org> Sender: linux-rdma-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: "Weiny, Ira" Cc: "linux-rdma (linux-rdma-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org)" List-Id: linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org On 4/4/2013 2:45 PM, Weiny, Ira wrote: > This changes the data sent by OSM_EVENT_ID_LFT_CHANGE. That event was just added and was experimental rather than being some preexisting event already in some release. > I think this is a dangerous precedent. It's not setting this precedent. -- Hal > Even though plugins must be coded to specific versions of OpenSM I don't think they will fail to compile with this change and users would get random behavior when they try to use the event_data passed. > > I think it might be more appropriate to define a new event id say OSM_EVENT_ID_LFT_BLOCK_CHANGE. > > Ira -- 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