[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <553760A8.2090802@profitbricks.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2015 10:49:44 +0200
From: Michael Wang <yun.wang@...fitbricks.com>
To: Jason Gunthorpe <jgunthorpe@...idianresearch.com>
CC: Roland Dreier <roland@...nel.org>,
Sean Hefty <sean.hefty@...el.com>, linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, hal@....mellanox.co.il,
Tom Tucker <tom@...ngridcomputing.com>,
Steve Wise <swise@...ngridcomputing.com>,
Hoang-Nam Nguyen <hnguyen@...ibm.com>,
Christoph Raisch <raisch@...ibm.com>,
Mike Marciniszyn <infinipath@...el.com>,
Eli Cohen <eli@...lanox.com>,
Faisal Latif <faisal.latif@...el.com>,
Jack Morgenstein <jackm@....mellanox.co.il>,
Or Gerlitz <ogerlitz@...lanox.com>,
Haggai Eran <haggaie@...lanox.com>,
Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@...el.com>, Tom Talpey <tom@...pey.com>,
Doug Ledford <dledford@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 22/27] IB/Verbs: Use management helper cap_ipoib()
On 04/22/2015 07:40 AM, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 10:41:38AM +0200, Michael Wang wrote:
>
>> Introduce helper cap_ipoib() to help us check if the port of an
>> IB device support IP over Infiniband.
>
> I thought we were dropping this in favor of listing the actual
> features the ULP required unconditionally? One of my messages had the
> start of a list..
Shall we drop it now or wait until the mechanism introduced?
Just wondering the requirement of ULP could be similar to the
requirement of management, isn't it? if the device can tell
which ULP it support, then may be a cap_XX() make sense in here?
Regards,
Michael Wang
>
> Jason
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists