[ofa-general] Re: [PATCH] IB/core: Enhance SMI for switchsupport

[Hal Rosenstock]

On Thu, 2007-03-29 at 14:22, Roland Dreier wrote: 
>  > I see what you are referring to now. That's true for the other routines
>  > but unfortunately not this one.
> 
> OK, that makes the current status even more confusing.
> 
>  > Not sure what the one set of names would be: 
>  > discard != local and process != send
>  > 
>  > Two sets of names (enums) could do it though.
> 
> Yes, if the two return values have distinct semantics then they should
> be using separate enums to indicate that.
> 
>  > If this is what is to be done then it should be 2 patches with the first
>  > preserving the current CA/router only support with the enums and the
>  > second adding in switch SMI.
> 
> Please, let's do this now, since we're in the area.  If we don't clean
> up the code now it will slip down the priority list again and probably
> never get done.

Sure but this is a background ("midnight") project and will take me a
few days to make sure nothing is broken in the changes even though they
appear to be straightforward to me.

-- Hal

>  - R.