On Thu, 2007-04-05 at 13:48, Roland Dreier wrote: > > C14-69 describes one such scenario where the SM is disabled out of band > > and the only way other SMs know there is an inactive SM there is via > > this capmask bit as it will not respond to SMInfo. > > I guess that's the central part of my confusion -- why do I care about > a disabled SM? What does another SM do differently depending on > whether a given port has a disabled SM or no SM at all?
I think there's conflicting compliances. p.865 C14-53 and C14-54.1.1 state the behavior I originally said (an not active SM responds to SMInfo gets/sets). I think this superceeds the first bullet in C14-70 which says incoming SMInfos are dropped. With that interpretation, does this make sense now ? -- Hal > - R. _______________________________________________ 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
