On 4/16/2015 9:41 AM, Michael Wang wrote:
>
>
> On 04/16/2015 03:36 PM, Hal Rosenstock wrote:
> [snip]
>>> -EXPORT_SYMBOL(rdma_node_get_transport);
>>> -
>>> enum rdma_link_layer rdma_port_get_link_layer(struct ib_device *device, u8
>>> port_num)
>>> {
>>> if (device->get_link_layer)
>>> diff --git a/include/rdma/ib_verbs.h b/include/rdma/ib_verbs.h
>>> index 262bf44..f9ef479 100644
>>> --- a/include/rdma/ib_verbs.h
>>> +++ b/include/rdma/ib_verbs.h
>>> @@ -84,9 +84,6 @@ enum rdma_transport_type {
>>> RDMA_TRANSPORT_IBOE,
>>> };
>>>
>>> -__attribute_const__ enum rdma_transport_type
>>> -rdma_node_get_transport(enum rdma_node_type node_type);
>>> -
>>> enum rdma_link_layer {
>>> IB_LINK_LAYER_UNSPECIFIED,
>>
>> Is IB_LINK_LAYER_UNSPECIFIED still possible ?
>
> Actually it's impossible in kernel at first, all those who implemented the
> callback
> won't return UNSPECIFIED, others all have the correct transport type
> (otherwise BUG())
> and won't result UNSPECIFIED :-)
Should it be removed from this enum somewhere in this patch series
(perhaps early on) ?
-- Hal
> Regards,
> Michael Wang
>
>>
>>> IB_LINK_LAYER_INFINIBAND,
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rdma" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
