Hal Rosenstock wrote:
On Wed, 2005-05-04 at 17:59, Tom Duffy wrote:

Signed-off-by: Tom Duffy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Index: dapl_openib_cm.c
===================================================================
--- linux-kernel/dat-provider/dapl_openib_cm.c  (revision 2257)
+++ linux-kernel/dat-provider/dapl_openib_cm.c  (working copy)
@@ -227,6 +227,9 @@ int dapl_cm_passive_cb_handler(struct ib
{
        int ret = 0;

+       if (!comm_id)
+               return -1;
+


I also think this should be:
        if (!comm_id)
                return 0;

but I'm not sure why the CM would callback with a NULL comm_id.

Also, I wonder if the same thing could occur on the active side too.

The CM shouldn't invoke a callback with a NULL cm_id. The actual calls look like this:


        ret = cm_id_priv->id.cm_handler(&cm_id_priv->id, &work->cm_event);

- Sean
_______________________________________________
openib-general mailing list
[email protected]
http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general

To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general

Reply via email to