I concur with your categorization of the application I mentioned. I was curious about the way going forward, as to whether anyone anticipated this to be a more commonly recurring issue.
Thanks in advance for the patch. -- Madhu -----Original Message----- From: Hal Rosenstock [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, August 14, 2006 4:39 PM To: Lakshmanan, Madhu; Michael S. Tsirkin Cc: [email protected] Subject: RE: Conflicting typedefs for "ib_gid_t" To answer your questions: I'm not totally sure about your application but it seems to me to fall in the category being discussed. Not all of the definitions in ib_types.h are elsewhere. I am working on a patch to get you past this issue. -- Hal ________________________________ From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Mon 8/14/2006 4:35 PM To: Hal Rosenstock; Michael S. Tsirkin Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [email protected] Subject: Re: Conflicting typedefs for "ib_gid_t" >>> I don't think the way forward is using iba/ in all applications. >>> I see it mostly as a legacy header for opensm and related apps >>> that want their own layer for portability between stacks. > > > > I agree with your view on iba/ib_types.h Does that imply that the definitions in iba/ib_types.h are not expected to be required or used by user-space applications other than those categories mentioned above? If iba/ib_types.h is only a legacy header, are the definitions also present in another header file? Madhu _______________________________________________ openib-general mailing list [email protected] http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
