> 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.
That's something else -- it's talking about a running SM that is in the NOT-ACTIVE state, because the master SM disabled it via a SubnSet(SMInfo). But that wouldn't affect the IsSMDisabled bit, which is something different: C14-69: If a SM can reside on a port, a vendor defined, out-of-band mechanism shall be provided that when asserted will disable the capability of running a SM from that port and the state of the mechanism shall be indicated in the Portinfo:CapabilityMask.IsSMdisabled bit. So if IsSMDisabled then an SM is forbidden from running at all. And I'm still confused -- why would anyone care whether a port has no SM running (ie IsSM is not asserted), or _really_ has no SM running (IsSM not asserted and IsSMDisabled asserted)? - 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
