On Fri, Nov 13, 2009 at 9:59 AM, Sasha Khapyorsky <[email protected]> wrote: > On 09:43 Fri 13 Nov , Hal Rosenstock wrote: >> On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 3:38 PM, Sasha Khapyorsky <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> > On 18:59 Fri 06 Nov , Sasha Khapyorsky wrote: >> >> On 09:42 Wed 04 Nov , Hal Rosenstock wrote: >> >> > >> >> > When --details selected, if PortCounters has transmit discards, then >> >> > query PortXmitDiscardDetails. On reset, if --details is selected, then >> >> > PortXmitDiscardDetails will also be reset. >> >> > >> >> > Unfortunately, PortSamplesControl:OptionMask can't be trusted to >> >> > determine >> >> > which PortXmitDiscardDetails counters are supported so an option was >> >> > added >> >> > for this. >> >> >> >> Interesting... Why so? Is it any bug in existing hw? Which one? >> > >> > Could you elaborate? >> >> I don't think this is the forum to discuss vendor bugs. > > Really? If so why did you post patch here which workarounds something > that you don't want to describe?
I wanted to answer why it wasn't done differently (without the vendor specifics). > I think that it is important for developers to be aware about existing > bugs which may require workarounds. Guess that this is also important > for vendors since they likely want to have working products. > > Anyway don't expect that next time I will apply things blindly. Didn't seem to me that anything has been applied blindly. -- Hal > Sasha > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rdma" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
