Fab Tillier wrote:
I don't understand the IB_AT_MOST macro. If someone uses IB_AT_MOST( 1 ) and
the hardware supports 4, they will get 4, which is definitely not "at most 1".
I would rename it to IB_MAX, and define it a -1 or something like that.
I agree with Fab. What the user wants is the maximum that they can get, and
IB_MAX conveys this better than IB_AT_MOST.
- 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
