[openib-general] Re: [PATCH] extend ib_device node_type to include iWarp

[Roland Dreier]

    Sean> As long as IB_NODE_IB remains 0, we can eliminate this
    Sean> change.  Or we could go with something like:

    Sean> if (device->node_type == IB_NODE_IB | IB_NODE_SWITCH)

That's still silly.  I wasn't very clear in my original email.  But my
point was that if a function does

	if ((device->node_type & IB_NODE_IB) != IB_NODE_IB)
		return;

then we should just write tests like

	if (device->node_type == IB_NODE_SWITCH) {

a few lines later.  We already know the node type is IB.

    Sean> The value being returned is no longer a member of the enum,
    Sean> but rather a value such as:

    Sean> IB_NODE_IB | IB_NODE_CA or IB_NODE_IWARP | IB_NODE_CA.

The C standard guarantees that an enum type is an integer type that
can hold any of the members |ed together.

 - R.