[openib-general] RE: [PATCH] osm_node_info_rcv - cosmetic

[Ofer Gigi]

1. It is up to you - I think it is clearer that way, and you don't have
to think who has precedence.
2. Yes, FATAL is better - thanks.

Thanks!
Ofer

-----Original Message-----
From: Hal Rosenstock [mailto:halr at voltaire.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, April 26, 2006 2:15 PM
To: Ofer Gigi
Cc: OPENIB
Subject: Re: [PATCH] osm_sa_mcmember_record : MCMember Get/GetTable
Trustedmode

Hi Ofer,

On Wed, 2006-04-26 at 05:29, Ofer Gigi wrote:
> Hi Hal,
> Small minor chnages:

Subject is inconsistent with the patch below.

> 1. Adding () for the if statement

Those extra parentheses shouldn't be needed as && is lower precedence
than ==.
 
> 2. Clearer messages when duplicate guids are found  

Should Fatal be FATAL so it really stands out ?

I applied the second portion of this patch with some cosmetic changes to
both the trunk and 1.0 branch.

-- Hal

> Thanks
> 
> Ofer G.
> 
> Signed-off-by:  Ofer Gigi <oferg at mellanox.co.il>