On 09:43 Thu 18 Dec , Hal Rosenstock wrote: > > > > Are you saying we need to return potentially more than 127 paths even if > > num_paths = 127 was specified explicitly? I don't think that this is a good > > idea. > > I thought that was your proposal in order not to change the API for this.
My proposal is to make OSMV_QUERY_PATH_REC_BY_* stuff (in opensm/libvendor/osm_vendor_*_sa) to be IBA complaint. And to use OSMV_QUERY_USER_DEFINED when we would like to create custom queries (for example without num_paths defined). > I also thought you "liked" the extensions provided by OpenSM. Yes, I'm. So I think it would be nice for OpenSM to handle queries where num_paths is not specified. But in case when num_paths is requested OpenSM should not ignore this and return records accordingly. > > Assuming you care about breaking backward compatibility > > Don't you ? > > > where this osm_vendor_sa API (OSMV_QUERY_PATH_REC_BY_*) is used today? > > saquery and osmtest. I can care about saquery - I always thought that OSMV_QUERY_USER_DEFINED is better and more useful than OSMV_QUERY_PATH_REC_BY_*. I don't expect any hurt for osmtest (however didn't check this yet). 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
