[openib-general] [PATCH] SMI update

[Sean Hefty]

>>     Hal> On second thought, it can work. Since there is only one port
>>     Hal> on the switch (base or enhanced switch port 0), the port_num
>>     Hal> parameter could be overloaded to mean the output port for DR
>>     Hal> SMI packets and ignored otherwise (LR) for switches.
>>
>> Which port_num parameter?  (I don't see any that look useful)
>
>My bad again :-( port_num needs to be at send time not registration
>time. An extra parameter is needed for ib_mad_post_send and ib_post_send
>for this. Do you see a way around it ?

Here's what I was thinking, so let me know if I'm way off here.

If a received SMP is valid, the SMI forwards it out the
initial_path[hop_ptr] port.  The send path updates the SMP's hop_ptr.  Right
now I only added the checks to validate received SMPs, but those checks
should include if the device is a switch.  (I asked for a phys_port_cnt to
validate initial_path[hop_ptr], but we can let this fail by verbs.)  I still
need to write the actual forwarding code.

Looking ahead in the mail thread, it looks like the verb definitions have
been fixed for switches.  Thanks