> int fi_alias(struct fid_ep *ep, fid_t *alias_ep, uint64_t flags); To be clear, this is the man page definition. The source code defines this as:
int fi_alias(struct fid *fid, struct fid **alias_fid, uint64_t flags) This in turn translates into fi_control(). > Instead, should we change the API as fi_ep_alias with the following > signature? > int fi_ep_alias(struct fid_ep *ep, struct fid_ep **alias_ep, uint64_t > flags); > > This will break ABI compatibility, but not sure if there are any > applications that currently use fi_alias. Given that struct fid is the first element of fid_ep, the ABI should be fine. This could change the API. > Another option is to keep fi_alias and add the new API fi_ep_alias (which > internally calls fi_alias). I would add fi_ep_alias over modifying fi_alias, and update the man page accordingly. - Sean _______________________________________________ ofiwg mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openfabrics.org/mailman/listinfo/ofiwg
