Hi Hal, Thanks for applying the patch.
Regarding the issues : Hal Rosenstock wrote: >>+ >>+ CL_ASSERT( p_pkey_tbl ); > > > Should the other routines also assert on this or should this be > consistent with the others ? Yes it should b consistent. Normally I add assertion on OUT parameters such that a "misuse" is caught. The idea is that parameters provided by reference are more likely to be passed by mistake as NULL. So I would remove the assert on p_key_tbl. > > >>+ CL_ASSERT( p_block_idx != NULL ); >>+ CL_ASSERT( p_pkey_idx != NULL ); > > > There is no p_pkey_idx parameter. I presume this should be p_pkey_index. Ooops - this means the code will not compile in debug mode ! I see you fixed that. > > > Also, two things about osm_pkey_mgr.c: > > Was there a need to reorder the routines ? This broke the diff so it had > to be done largely by hand. I reordered to to be defined in the order used. Already agree with Sasha that I should have done that on separate patch. > > Also, it would have been nice not to mix the format changes with the > substantive changes. Try to keep it to "one thought per patch". OK. > > This patch has been applied with cosmetic changes. We will go from > here... Thanks Eitan _______________________________________________ openib-general mailing list openib-general@openib.org http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
