> No reason for them to be different. Roland already suggested to use a > union here although he defines the union locally inside the containing > struct thus he has two definitions for the same union. Roland do you > intend to commit that?
I can if everyone agrees with it. I can't think of a good way to describe the union independently, so I think I'll keep it as being duplicated between the WR and completion structures. - R. _______________________________________________ general mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openfabrics.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/general To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
