[openib-general] kernel oops

[Sean Hefty]

Hal Rosenstock wrote:
>>Can we just remove this field and 
>>use the sgid to locate the correct device structure in the kernel, or 
>>fail if it cannot be located?
> 
> That seems like a good idea.

Quickly skimming through the code I couldn't easily locate where AT maintained a 
device list, or how it retrieved the device pointer.

> Won't AT still be needed under the new CM abstraction for IB ? I guess
> the answer is unclear. It still seems to me that it should be fixed
> until there is something else to take its place. Do you concur ?

Had the fix been easy (for me to figure out how to make anyway) I would have 
submitted a patch.  Something like AT is likely to be needed, but it's not clear 
how close the final version will be to what's there now.  If we can at least 
validate the device pointer, it may be good enough to continue using for the 
time being.

- Sean