On 12/20/2014 8:22 PM, Vangelis Tasoulas wrote: > From a399cd7398a86b72541c628588365c252882cd80 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > From: Vangelis Tasoulas <[email protected]> > Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2014 19:10:33 +0100 > Subject: [PATCH] Fixes wrong assertion failed in osm_switch_get_lft_block() > when LIDs from the top LFT block (0xbfc0-0xbfff) are used. > > --- > opensm/osm_switch.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/opensm/osm_switch.c b/opensm/osm_switch.c > index 11efd54..a28ec28 100644 > --- a/opensm/osm_switch.c > +++ b/opensm/osm_switch.c > @@ -168,7 +168,7 @@ boolean_t osm_switch_get_lft_block(IN const > osm_switch_t * p_sw, > if (base_lid_ho > p_sw->max_lid_ho) > return FALSE; > > - CL_ASSERT(base_lid_ho + IB_SMP_DATA_SIZE <= IB_LID_UCAST_END_HO); > + CL_ASSERT(base_lid_ho + IB_SMP_DATA_SIZE - 1 <= > IB_LID_UCAST_END_HO); What about using IB_LID_MCAST_START_HO (49152) instead of IB_LID_UCAST_END_HO (49151)? No additional arithemtic will be needed then.
> memcpy(p_block, &(p_sw->lft[base_lid_ho]), IB_SMP_DATA_SIZE); > return TRUE; > } > -- 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
