> static const struct ib_field path_rec_table[] = {
> - { RESERVED,
> - .offset_words = 0,
> - .offset_bits = 0,
> - .size_bits = 32 },
> - { RESERVED,
> - .offset_words = 1,
> + { PATH_REC_FIELD(service_id),
> + .offset_words = 2,
I haven't read the proposed annex, but I would have expected this to be
offset_words = 0. Otherwise, it seems that the service_id would fall over the
dgid.
> .offset_bits = 0,
> - .size_bits = 32 },
> + .size_bits = 64 },
> { PATH_REC_FIELD(dgid),
> .offset_words = 2,
> .offset_bits = 0,
> @@ -178,7 +174,7 @@ static const struct ib_field path_rec_ta
> .offset_words = 12,
> .offset_bits = 16,
> .size_bits = 16 },
> - { RESERVED,
> + { PATH_REC_FIELD(priority),
> .offset_words = 13,
> .offset_bits = 0,
> .size_bits = 12 },
> Index: linux-2.6/include/rdma/ib_sa.h
> ===================================================================
> --- linux-2.6.orig/include/rdma/ib_sa.h
> +++ linux-2.6/include/rdma/ib_sa.h
> @@ -109,8 +109,9 @@ enum ib_sa_selector {
> * Reserved rows are indicated with comments to help maintainability.
> */
>
> -/* reserved: 0 */
> -/* reserved: 1 */
> +#define IB_SA_PATH_REC_SERVICE_ID (IB_SA_COMP_MASK( 0) | \
> + IB_SA_COMP_MASK( 1))
> +
Does the annex redefine how component mask works, or does it make path records
have a special case? (I'll try to look at the annex; it's just that this
definition isn't obvious to me.)
- 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
