Tom Tucker wrote:
+struct iw_cm_verbs;
struct ib_device {
struct device *dma_device;
@@ -840,6 +844,8 @@
u32 flags;
+ struct iw_cm_verbs* iwcm;
+
Does anyone object to adding this to ib_device? I'm not thrilled about this,
but I don't see another alternative, and I'm not sure it's any worse than having
a 'process_mad' function.
Maybe we need a more generic way of providing transport/device specific
extensions? Something like:
struct ib_device {
...
union {
struct iw_verbs *iw;
struct ib_verbs *ib;
} ext_verbs;
...
};
Thoughts?
- 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
