On Thu, 2006-04-06 at 16:16, Sean Hefty wrote:
> Roland Dreier wrote:
> > > + dev = kmalloc(sizeof *dev + device->phys_port_cnt * sizeof
> > *port,
> > > + GFP_KERNEL);
> > > + if (!dev)
> > > + return;
> > > +
> > > + for (i = 1; i <= device->phys_port_cnt; i++) {
> >
> > Seems like this is implicitly assuming that the IB device is a CA.
> >
> > Maybe we should give up the ghost and stop trying to support IB switches?
>
> I can go either way here. Would someone want to use this module on a switch?
Yes. IPoIB can run on enhanced switch port 0.
-- Hal
> If so, I can fix up the code so that it can work on one, or at least change
> the
> checks that the device is a CA.
>
> I thought that someone was running at least ib_mad on a switch. I'm just not
> sure which other modules are likely to run on them.
>
> - 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
_______________________________________________
openib-general mailing list
[email protected]
http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
