> Quoting Hal Rosenstock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Subject: Re: [PATCH] osm: Converting the the C++ code to C inosm_ucast_lash.c > > On Wed, 2007-03-07 at 07:12, Yevgeny Kliteynik wrote: > > Hal Rosenstock wrote: > > > On Wed, 2007-03-07 at 03:40, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > >>> Quoting Yevgeny Kliteynik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > >>> Subject: Re: [PATCH] osm: Converting the the C++ code to C in > > >>> osm_ucast_lash.c > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > >>>>> Hi Hal. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Converting the the C++ code to C. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Please apply both to trunk and to 1.2 > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Thanks. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Signed-off-by: Yevgeny Kliteynik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > >>>> NAK. > > >>>> 1. I don't see any C++ here. > > >>>> > > >>>> 2. Why do we need this on ofed branch? > > >>>> Only bugfixes should go there. What bug does it fix? > > >>> There are 3 things in this patch: > > >>> 1. int i -> uint16_t i > > >>> 2. Moving variable declaration (switch_bitmap) to the beginning > > >>> of the function (currently, it is declared after OSM_LOG_ENTER) > > >>> 3. Changing C99 dynamically allocated array to the old style. > > >>> > > >>> First two can be categorized as bugs. > > >>> > > >>> The third one is for compiler on windows. > > >>> > > >>> Each of these elements breaks OSM compilation on Windows. > > >>> > > >>> If we don't include either of these, then OFED 1.2 OpenSM compilation > > >>> on windows will be broken. > > >> Ultimately, whether to merge this this and where is up to the > > >> maintainer. But I > > >> note that OFED 1.2 goals do not include windows builds. > > > > > > While not a formal OFED 1.2 goal, doesn't this depend on whether there > > > is intended to be a Windows equivalent to the OFED 1.2 OpenSM ? > > > > I'm not aware of any plans for windows equivalent to the OFED 1.2 OpenSM, > > Should there be ?
Isn't that what we need to know to decide whether to merge this patch? > master may be less stable and certainly is likely to > be less tested than OFED 1.2 at any point in time. I guess openib-windows guys will be able to branch off from ofed 1.2 branch if they like. But even if you fix compilation issues on ofed 1.2 now, it's unlikely a windows release won't include other changes as compared to the linux one. So why bother? -- MST _______________________________________________ general mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openfabrics.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/general To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
