On Wed, 3 Aug 2011 08:44:22 -0700
Hal Rosenstock <[email protected]> wrote:

> On 8/3/2011 11:39 AM, Ira Weiny wrote:
> > 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.
> 
> Sure, if they're all "new" enums then it's OK to fix those. I thought
> there were some older ones in that list but maybe I'm wrong...

I double checked and they are all "new" since the last release.

Thanks, applied,
Ira

> 
> -- Hal
> 
> > 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