On Wed, 3 Aug 2011 00:32:56 -0700
Hal Rosenstock <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hi Al,
> 
> On 8/2/2011 8:10 PM, Albert Chu wrote:
> > I noticed that a number of field names did not have the "_F" suffix on
> > them. The patch below cleans this up and makes things consistent.
> 
> I think the ship has sailed on this due to backward compatibility. IMO
> the best that could be done now is to add the _F suffixes to be the same
> as the ones without them.
> 
> For example,
> ...
>       IB_PC_PORT_VL_OP_PACKETS1,
>       IB_PC_PORT_VL_OP_PACKETS1_F = IB_PC_PORT_VL_OP_PACKETS1,
>       IB_PC_PORT_VL_OP_PACKETS2,
>       IB_PC_PORT_VL_OP_PACKETS2_F = IB_PC_PORT_VL_OP_PACKETS2,
> ...


I don't think so.  The last version (tag 1.3.7, released 2/14/2011) does not 
include IB_PC_PORT_VL_OP_PACKETS1.  So I think we can still change them before 
the release.

I think that is true of all the fields in the patch but I will check again.

Ira

> 
> -- Hal
> 
> > Al
> > 
> 


-- 
Ira Weiny
Math Programmer/Computer Scientist
Lawrence Livermore National Lab
925-423-8008
[email protected]
--
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

Reply via email to