> There is no qp type IBV_QPT_RAW_ETY in user space (at least not in the > definitions > coming with libibverbs). In fact, libibverbs that comes with OFED defines > (in verbs.h) > a qp type called IBV_QPT_RAW_ETT which equals to 7. > The patch that is under discussion here adds a new qp type IB_QPT_RAW_ETH > and equals it to 7 > to match the definition in user space. This indeed changes the value of > IB_QPT_RAW_ETY to 8 > but I don't see who can be affected since > 1. No user space program that uses IB_QPT_RAW_ETY exists > 2. kernel is compiled as one piece of code.
Why renumber the _ETY enum? Maybe it doesn't break anything serious but why risk it? -- Roland Dreier <rola...@cisco.com> || For corporate legal information go to: http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/index.html _______________________________________________ ewg mailing list ewg@lists.openfabrics.org http://lists.openfabrics.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ewg
