> Yes, we need to have a clear expectation of how the timer behaves. It > seems that the current issue is rooted in the fact that opensm made > assumptions about timers based on the Linux implementation, and that the > Windows timer implementation is *much* more relaxed in its operation.
The behavior between user space and the kernel will likely be different. For the kernel, we should toss the abstraction completely, but for now, I assumed that the code behaved like the underlying kernel timers. E.g. start implicitly cancels the timer if it's running. _______________________________________________ ofw mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openfabrics.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ofw
