> > > this is now returning a pointer to the MAD layer's internal QP. I > > > guess this is OK -- the only user of the pointer seems to be the mthca > > > MAD_IFC command, which just grabs the QP number anyway. But I just > > > wanted to point out this wart... > > > > What's the problem with this? > > It's a bit of a layering violation -- a consumer uses the MAD layer > through the agent abstraction and so on, and then ends up getting a > pointer to the MAD layer's QP struct. > > I don't think it's really a big deal but it's worth pointing out.
Yea. Well, one can argue that passing ib_wc for a work request that a client didn't build is a layering violation too - e.g. the wr_id does not make much sense either, does it? But it still seems easier than invent a ib_mad_wc. -- MST _______________________________________________ openib-general mailing list [email protected] http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
