Re: [PATCH] Fixes wrong assertion failed in osm_switch_get_lft_block()

[Vangelis Tasoulas <vangelis-S8y2klWGCOFhl2p70BpVqQ@public.gmane.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1553 bytes --]

On 12/21/2014 11:07 AM, Ilya Nelkenbaum wrote:
> On 12/20/2014 8:22 PM, Vangelis Tasoulas wrote:
>> From a399cd7398a86b72541c628588365c252882cd80 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
>> From: Vangelis Tasoulas <vangelis-e629+x1LERvk1uMJSBkQmQ@public.gmane.org>
>> Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2014 19:10:33 +0100
>> Subject: [PATCH] Fixes wrong assertion failed in osm_switch_get_lft_block()
>>  when LIDs from the top LFT block (0xbfc0-0xbfff) are used.
>>
>> ---
>>  opensm/osm_switch.c | 2 +-
>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/opensm/osm_switch.c b/opensm/osm_switch.c
>> index 11efd54..a28ec28 100644
>> --- a/opensm/osm_switch.c
>> +++ b/opensm/osm_switch.c
>> @@ -168,7 +168,7 @@ boolean_t osm_switch_get_lft_block(IN const
>> osm_switch_t * p_sw,
>>         if (base_lid_ho > p_sw->max_lid_ho)
>>                 return FALSE;
>>
>> -       CL_ASSERT(base_lid_ho + IB_SMP_DATA_SIZE <= IB_LID_UCAST_END_HO);
>> +       CL_ASSERT(base_lid_ho + IB_SMP_DATA_SIZE - 1 <=
>> IB_LID_UCAST_END_HO);
> What about using IB_LID_MCAST_START_HO (49152) instead of IB_LID_UCAST_END_HO (49151)?
> No additional arithemtic will be needed then.

This function is about the LFTs and not the MFTs, so having '<=
IB_LID_MCAST_START_HO' would look a bit confusing -at least to me- at a
first glance due to the equal sign.

Less or equal to the first mcast LID? I understand the less, but why equal?

> 
>>         memcpy(p_block, &(p_sw->lft[base_lid_ho]), IB_SMP_DATA_SIZE);
>>         return TRUE;
>>  }
>>
> 



[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 473 bytes --]