> > I can change the type check into a function if you feel its open > coded. > > One of the benefits of adding type to ah_attr is exactly the above > code. > > The caller doesnt have to call into the core (rdma_cap_eth_ah) to > know what > > 'protocol' its working with. That information is contained in the > ah_attr itself. > > > I was referring to have helper function like rdma_cap_eth_ah, but for > ah_attr_type > as, > is_ah_attr_eth(ah_attr). > > I think it will be more useful, as there is more code in grh > processing coming up, that needs to diverge based on ib vs roce. > And there are few places we have that comparison anyway below. It just > keep code neat. FWIW, I don't see a benefit to converting a simple type check of an enum into a function. The type allows its use in a switch statement, rather than needing to use if - else-if - else-if. > While we are at it, I was thinking since iWarp doesn't use AH, we > better name ah->type as ROCE, to avoid this confusion happening again? I agree, though I'm still not sure v1 and v2 need all the same fields or use them in the same way. Conceptually, a GRH in v2 doesn't make sense to me. (I should go read the spec.) But in any case v1/v2 separation could come as follow on changes. - Sean -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rdma" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
