On Wed, 2008-06-25 at 20:12 +0300, Sasha Khapyorsky wrote: > On 08:07 Wed 25 Jun , Hal Rosenstock wrote: > > > > Right now, these are nice to have but maybe are needed for future > > changes and trying to judge the waters in terms of inline use. I was > > also experimenting with some header inclusion issues I ran into. > > Like what?
In an early approach to adding the MLID array, I had tried including osm_multicast.h in osm_subnet.h and started dealing with the compile issues. -- Hal > > > I likely fine about the first case (especially about > > > osm_port_prof_set_ignored_port()), but the second function really looks > > > as "one-line stuff" for me. > > > > By second function, I presume you are referring to > > osm_port_prof_is_ignored_port. I'm not sure what you mean by "one line > > stuff" but maybe that also applies to the other patch relating to inline > > (opensm/osm_switch: Don't inline osm_switch_sp0_is_lmc_capable > > function). > > I was about second patch, but osm_port_prof_is_ignored_port() is pretty > short too. I would not bother and leave it to compiler to decide. > Sasha > _______________________________________________ > 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 _______________________________________________ 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
