[openib-general] Conflicting typedefs for "ib_gid_t"

[Hal Rosenstock]

I agree with your view on iba/ib_types.h

I'm not sure I understand what you mean in terms of libibumad. He's including libibmad rather than libibumad.
So I suspect you mean changing this (ib_gid_t) to mad_gid_t ?

-- Hal

________________________________

From: Michael S. Tsirkin [mailto:mst at mellanox.co.il]
Sent: Mon 8/14/2006 3:44 PM
To: mlakshmanan at silverstorm.com
Cc: openib-general at openib.org; Hal Rosenstock
Subject: Re: Conflicting typedefs for "ib_gid_t"



Quoting r. mlakshmanan at silverstorm.com <mlakshmanan at silverstorm.com>:
> Subject: Re: Conflicting typedefs for "ib_gid_t"
>
> > 
> > This is a similar but more mainstream example of the conflicts.  A previous
> > one was reported last week in terms of CM. Still not sure of the best
> > resolution for this.
> > 
> > Do you really need both includes ?
> > 
>
> The userspace tool shows a textual representation of a HCA port's capability
> mask. So it requires the port capability bit definitions in ib_types.h. And I
> require mad.h for the MAD API.

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.

Wrt issue at hand, using ib_ prefix anywhere is a mistake which will always lead
to conflicts between libraries.  Let us start prefixing types libibumad defines
with umad_, just like ib verbs library prefixes types by ibv_.

For example we have union ibv_gid, so can't mad.h have umad_gid_t?

Hal, what do you say?

--
MST