On Thu, Dec 18, 2008 at 10:48 AM, Sasha Khapyorsky <[email protected]> wrote: > On 10:18 Thu 18 Dec , Hal Rosenstock wrote: >> >> > I don't expect any hurt for osmtest (however didn't check this yet). >> >> Depends on what you mean by hurt: >> >> osmtest/osmtest.c: req.query_type = OSMV_QUERY_PATH_REC_BY_PORT_GUIDS; >> osmtest/osmtest.c: req.query_type = OSMV_QUERY_PATH_REC_BY_GIDS; >> osmtest/osmtest.c: req.query_type = OSMV_QUERY_PATH_REC_BY_LIDS; >> osmtest/osmtest.c: req.query_type = OSMV_QUERY_PATH_REC_BY_PORT_GUIDS; >> >> So in line with your approach, these instances should be changed over >> to user specified ones. > > Look closer how it is used there
I'm well aware of how it's used there. > - it is transparent to num_paths > returned. I don't think we need to change something in osmtest. In terms of breaking osmtest, it doesn't but it is a semantical change and no longer will all paths always be able to be validated without such a change. I know I used to find that useful there. >> Also, IMO saquery should support both compliant and extended queries. > > If somebody cares I can accept the patch with '--complaint' option > implemented. I think you mean --noncompliant but anyhow I don't like the backward compatibility/old semantics not being supported (in addition in these in tree applications) but not sure I have the time. -- Hal > 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
