[ofa-general] [PATCH] IB/CM: add support for routed paths

[Jason Gunthorpe]

On Tue, Dec 11, 2007 at 10:50:01AM -0800, Hal Rosenstock wrote:

> Guess I don't see much difference (on the passive side) in checking the
> LIDs for permissive or the subnet local field to determine whether to
> use the LIDs from the LRH. The only difference is this additional
> special meaning to the permissive LIDs.

I think there are three cases here:

1) It is subnet local, the node should just use the lids
2) It is not subnet local, and the necessary local lids are not known.
   The node should do the LRH copy work around
3) It is not subnet local, and the necessary local lids are provided.
   The node shoul djust use the the lids.

Just using the subnet local field does not provide enough information
to tell which of the three cases we need to use.

I expect the main use of the subnet local bit should be control use
of a GRH on that path - we have overloaded hoplimit for that case
which is probably not entirely correct.

Jason