[ofa-general] Re: [PATCH OpenSM 0/3] Fat Tree - Routing between non-CN nodes

[Hal Rosenstock]

On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 8:26 AM, Yevgeny Kliteynik
<kliteyn at dev.mellanox.co.il> wrote:
> Sasha Khapyorsky wrote:
>>
>> On 10:25 Wed 11 Feb     , Nicolas Morey Chaisemartin wrote:
>>>
>>> What about high nodes (HN) as it concerns only nodes which are not at the
>>> bottom of the fat tree?
>>
>> Could be fine. Let's ask Yevgeny too... :)
>>
>> Yevgeny! Any idea about io_nodes more generic name?
>
> Ugh...
>
> "IO nodes":
> Pros: the name is closer to the reality, since in most cases
> the nodes that would need special treatment are indeed IO nodes.
> Cons: the name is not "general"...
>
> "High nodes"
> Pros: general name with kinda "hint" to the special treatment.
> Cons: the "hint" is rather vague...
>
> Bottom line - I'm OK with both options (slightly leaning toward IO),
> as long as it is described well enough in the help message and in man :)

Maybe consistency is the hobgobblin of small minds but don't we now have:

high nodes which is a topology based name
and
compute nodes which is a functional based name.

Is it worth having them consistent ?

-- Hal

> -- Yevgeny
>
>> Sasha
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> general mailing list
> general at lists.openfabrics.org
> http://lists.openfabrics.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/general
>
> To unsubscribe, please visit
> http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
>