On Thu, 2007-04-12 at 13:36, Roland Dreier wrote:
> Definitely a big improvement to readability. However, I don't like
> the "smi_type" name, since the enum is not really a type but rather an
> action:
>
> > +enum smi_type {
> > + IB_SMI_DISCARD,
> > + IB_SMI_HANDLE
> > +};
> > +
> > +enum smi_forward_type {
> > + IB_SMI_LOCAL, /* SMP should be completed up the stack */
> > + IB_SMI_SEND, /* received DR SMP should be forwarded to the send
> queue */
> > +};
>
> Is it OK if I do s/smi_type/smi_action/ and
> s/smi_forward_type/smi_forward_action/
> before applying this?
Sure; that's an improvement.
My one other comment with the patch was about testing relative to iPath
and perhaps eHCA. I think things should work but it would be best if
someone verify this.
-- 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
