Hi Sasha, I think changing the basic concept of a "manager" in OpenSM is not just a cleanup issue. I am for improving the code - but not for breaking its basic architecture.
If you find dead code or unused code - let's fix it. But please try to keep the "structure" untouched. I have a many ideas for how OpenSM could be re-written in a better way too. (Like avoiding SA code duplication by using C++ or C virtual functions) but I do not think it is a small change - but rather a big one (actually a re-write). One day we might decide a re-write of the SM is required but this should not be taken lightly as it would probably take a significant effort and a few years to get back to the current status. Eitan Eitan Zahavi Design Technology Director Mellanox Technologies LTD Tel:+972-4-9097208 Fax:+972-4-9593245 P.O. Box 586 Yokneam 20692 ISRAEL > -----Original Message----- > From: Sasha Khapyorsky [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Thursday, May 04, 2006 3:26 AM > To: Eitan Zahavi > Cc: Hal Rosenstock; [email protected]; Ofer Gigi; Yael Kalka > Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] opensm: remove unused osm_pkey_mgr_t object > > Hello Eitan, > > On 11:41 Tue 02 May , Eitan Zahavi wrote: > > > > I really do not like this patch. I think that although it does not break > > the code TODAY, it will be reversed later. > > OpenSM uses the concept of "manager" for each of the algorithms used. > > One could claim that all these managers are redundant and could be > > replaced by an extension to the osm object. This is true but will result > > with a non clear boundary between the managers. > > "manager" concept is fine, but I don't see how useless structure should > help in implementing this. OTOH there are tons of duplications and > unnecessary code in OpenSM today - we need to improve this. > > > Although there is no right or wrong on this kind of issues, I think that > > the winning argument is that today OpenSM is written according to the > > above simple rule. > > Hmm, so what is your argument - "it is so now, don't change it"? But the > goal is to improve things. > > Sasha. _______________________________________________ openib-general mailing list [email protected] http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
