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

[Hal Rosenstock]

On Thu, 2007-03-29 at 13:30, Roland Dreier wrote:
>  > None of the functions in smi.c follow your definition. 
>  > 0 is used to say discard packet and 1 for completion up the stack.
> 
>  > So, I am not sure if reworking this one function with 3 return values buys
>  > anything.
> 
> Good point, I didn't look closely at smi.c.  I think reworking all the
> smi.c return values with explicit IB_SMI_DISCARD etc return values
> would make the code much easier to understand.  Probably doing that as
> a separate patch before adding the switch stuff would be a good idea.

Rather than IB_SMI_DISCARD, it seems to me that IB_SMI_LOCAL and
IB_SMI_SEND would be more in keeping with the current comments.

Is a separate patch for this along these lines really needed before the
switch SMI changes ?

-- Hal

>  - R.