On Thu, 2006-03-16 at 08:44 -0800, Roland Dreier wrote: > Steve> Roland? Do you need another patch from me without the ah > Steve> changes? Or will you just apply it either as-is or remove > Steve> the ah stuff yourself? > > I think I would like to see no checks for create_ah/destroy_ah within > the ib_create_ah() and ib_destroy_ah() functions, and changes to > ib_device_register() so that create_ah/destroy_ah methods are > mandatory only for IB devices. > > I don't think we're at the point of applying anything yet. We need a > coherent patch series for all the iWARP changes, plus an iWARP > low-level driver (either amso1100 or the chelsio driver, although > amso1100 looks closer to being mergable). > > - R.
I was thinking changes that aren't dependent on the iwarp code itself should be pulled in when ready and agreed-upon by the group. This modify_port/process_mad change is such a change. No? _______________________________________________ openib-general mailing list [email protected] http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
