On 14:51 Mon 02 Feb , Sean Hefty wrote: > >>4) saquery.c is the only diags pgms (so far) which uses OpenSM MAD > >>interfaces; > >>the rest use libibmad. > > Looking briefly at the saquery code, I don't understand the benefit to using > the > opensm vendor interfaces, versus using libibmad or even libibumad directly, > and > switching to libibumad looks doable. (It's not clear to me that there are > benefits to using libibmad over libibumad for saquery.) > > - osm_bind_handle_t looks like it could map to a libibumad port_id (int). > - osmv_query_sa() could map to umad_send(), followed by umad_recv() to > obtain the result. (Replace osmv_query_sa with a new function.) > - There are a couple other calls that are used to loop through all returned > attributes in a response MAD. We could use the MAD attribute offset > directly. (Update loops where osmv_get_query_* is called.) > > Are there technical reasons why the opensm vendor library was chosen for > saquery?
AFAIK there are no such reasons. > Would there be any objection to changing saquery to use libibumad > directly? Not from me. 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
