Shirley Ma wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 10/16/2006 01:50:49 PM: > > On Mon, 2006-10-16 at 15:25 +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > > Quoting r. Maestas, Christopher Daniel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > > So I would think rhel5 would have at least that or greater. When I > > > > compiled rpms for 1.1rc7 it generated: > > > > --- > > > > # ls libibverbs-* > > > > libibverbs-1.0.4-0.x86_64.rpm > libibverbs-utils-1.0.4-0.x86_64.rpm > > > > libibverbs-devel-1.0.4-0.x86_64.rpm > > > > > > Dough, would it be possible to update this + libmthca? > > > > Possibly. What's the justification? What's in 1.0.4 that is the > > primary reason for wanting to update from 1.0.3?
> I am not sure whether this already has an answer. > The justification is madvise(..., MADV_DONTFORK) is used to make fork() > work for verbs consumers in the recent packages. I hope same patch will > be in libehca. Just to crlarify: libibverbs-1.X does not include the madvise(...,MADV_DONTFORK) fork() support, it was integrated into libibverbs1.1 which is not released yet. Or. _______________________________________________ openib-general mailing list [email protected] http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
