Quoting r. Sean Hefty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Subject: Re: Re: [PATCH] RFC Verbs: add support for transport specific verbs > > Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > >Is it worth it to separate these things out? > >Even within IB lots of methods are optional - so why cant an iWarp device > >just > >avoid defining process_local_mad, and IB device avoid defining iWarp CM > >ops? > > There are 7 additional function needed by iWarp. How should these be added > to ib_device? Using process_mad as an example, we would add all 7 function > prototypes directly to ib_device.
Right. Thats what I had in mind. So they are NULL for IB devices and thats that . -- Michael S. Tsirkin Staff Engineer, Mellanox Technologies _______________________________________________ openib-general mailing list [email protected] http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
