[openib-general] RE: OpenSM Work

[Hal Rosenstock]

Hi Eitan,

While I don't understand why the update for 1.8.0 can't be done by
patches which is the usual way (I think it could be broken at least into
complib, then vendor lib, then SM, and finally SA changes), I will work
on merging Yael's branch for this. Note that there may be some back and
forth on this similar to comments on patches. In the future, I hope that
work can be done in smaller incremental pieces and with patches.

As to the directory structure, there are projects which follow the
structure which is being used in the OpenIB tree. The makefiles already
do install the headers. That being said the directory structure is not
cast in stone but there is a lot of churn here to change it. Are there
any other clear benefits ? Does it somehow make your internal
development easier ? If that is it, I don't see why a correspondence
script wouldn't work. Typically things like this are community decided.

I would think the simulator work is separable and would prefer to hold
off on this until the OpenSM merge is done and working. That alone seems
like a lot to swallow at once.

Finally, as to feedback on the proposals for OpenSM work, as I recall,
there were responses from both Tom and myself both being supportive of
new functionality and some design review issues (particularly relating
to routing algorithms proposed). I would expect this work to generate
more feedback as there is code to go along with it or possibly even with
an update on the design approach.

-- Hal