James Lentini wrote:
Why not make REJECTED mean NON_PEER_REJECTED and add a PEER_REJECTED?
In other words:
enum ib_cma_event {
IB_CMA_EVENT_ESTABLISHED = 1,
IB_CMA_EVENT_REJECTED,
IB_CMA_EVENT_PEER_REJECTED,
IB_CMA_EVENT_DISCONNECTED,
IB_CMA_EVENT_UNREACHABLE
};
In my opinion this makes the hierarchy clearer. There are general
rejections and specific peer rejections.
From an implementation viewpoint, I'm not sure we can distinguish between
rejected and peer rejected. How about just rejected with some additional reject
information in the case that the user cares?
- 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
