On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 3:43 PM, Smith, Stan <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Skip the destination lid byte-order swap as it's already in the correct order 
> for vendor IBAL.
>
> Permits 'osmtest -f f -s4' test to correctly complete.
>
> signed-off-by: stan smith <[email protected]>
>
> --- a/ulp/opensm/user/osmtest/osmtest.c Thu May 20 12:34:59 2010
> +++ b/ulp/opensm/user/osmtest/osmtest.c Thu May 20 12:36:33 2010
> @@ -2885,7 +2885,11 @@
>        memset(&context, 0, sizeof(context));
>
>        slid = cl_ntoh16(p_osmt->local_port.lid);
> +#ifdef OSM_VENDOR_INTF_AL
> +       dlid = p_osmt->local_port.sm_lid; // already in correct byte-order
> +#else
>        dlid = cl_ntoh16(p_osmt->local_port.sm_lid);
> +#endif

Seems weird to me that port LID would be in network order but SM LID
is not (for OSM_VENDOR_INTF_AL).

-- Hal

>
>        /*
>         * Do a blocking query for the PathRecord.
> _______________________________________________
> ofw mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.openfabrics.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ofw
>
_______________________________________________
ofw mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openfabrics.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ofw

Reply via email to