On 21:18 Tue 17 Feb , Hal Rosenstock wrote: > On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 7:39 PM, Sasha Khapyorsky <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 09:52 Mon 16 Feb , Hal Rosenstock wrote: > >> > >> A first step would be removing the portid as static. If so, portid > >> would need to be a supplied parameter to various mad routines and the > >> existing ones relying on madrpc_portid would be deprecated. Does this > >> make sense to do ? > > > > A first step would be converting all clients and internal usage in > > libibmad (if any) to use a newer interface. If this will go smoothly > > and things will not become overcomlicated, we could move forward - > > to deprecate old interface... etc.. Nothing new. > > Why nothing new ? I think there are higher level support functions > which need to support the newer API.
Meant "nothing new" in API replace/upgrade procedure. 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
