On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 4:20 PM, Ira Weiny <wei...@llnl.gov> wrote:
> On Thu, 17 Sep 2009 10:35:39 -0700
> "Sean Hefty" <sean.he...@intel.com> wrote:
>
> > >> #define IB_PATH_RECORD_REVERSIBLE 0x80
> > >>
> > >> struct ib_path_record
> > >> {
> > >> uint64_t service_id;
> > >> union ibv_gid dgid;
> > >> union ibv_gid sgid;
> > >> uint16_t dlid;
> > >> uint16_t slid;
> > >> uint32_t flowlabel_hoplimit; /* resv-31:28 flow label-27:8
> hop
> > >limit-7:0*/
> > >> uint8_t tclass;
> > >> uint8_t reversible_numpath; /* reversible-7:7 num path-6:0
> */
> > >> uint16_t pkey;
> > >> uint16_t qosclass_sl; /* qos class-15:4 sl-3:0 */
> > >> uint8_t mtu; /* mtu selector-7:6 mtu-5:0 */
> > >> uint8_t rate; /* rate selector-7:6 rate-5:0
> */
> > >> uint8_t packetlifetime; /* lifetime selector-7:6
> > lifetime-5:0
> > >*/
> > >> uint8_t preference;
> > >> uint8_t reserved[6];
> > >> };
> > >
> > >I would prefer to use the structures already defined in ib_types.h... I
> > >understand your not wanting to make ACM dependant on the OpenSM packages
> so is
> > >it time to move ib_types.h out of the OpenSM tree and somewhere more
> generic?
> > >Perhaps libibumad? This also applies to ib_sa_mad in your 5th patch.
> > >
> > >OTOH, ib_types.h is a 10K line file with multiple long (>10 lines)
> inlined
> > >functions. Perhaps it deserves it's own library?
> >
> > Defining some of these types in libibumad isn't a bad idea. Although,
> WinOF
> > actually has 2 copies of ib_types.h (that differ...) I find using
> ib_types.h
> > painful given its size; separate header files may help.
>
> Yes I was thinking multiple headers. There seems like there is already
> some precedent in ib_cm_types.h (although that entire file seems to be
> enclosed in a #ifndef WIN32 clause? So am I wrong on this?)
>
> In the end I would like to make ib_types.h just list the specific headers.
>
> Sasha, would you be willing to accept such a patch? First move ib_types.h
> to umad
I'm not sure this is a good idea. ibutils (ibis and ibmgtsim) wants
ib_types.h but does not want libibumad.
-- Hal
> and then move the long inline functions into the lib and separate out the
> remaining header.
>
> Or would you prefer a new library? I think there is enough code there but
> I leave it up to you.
>
> Ira
>
> >
> > - Sean
> >
>
>
> --
> Ira Weiny
> Math Programmer/Computer Scientist
> Lawrence Livermore National Lab
> 925-423-8008
> wei...@llnl.gov
> _______________________________________________
> ofw mailing list
> o...@lists.openfabrics.org
> http://lists.openfabrics.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ofw
>
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
general@lists.openfabrics.org
http://lists.openfabrics.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/general
To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
