[openib-general] Conflicting typedefs for "ib_gid_t"

[Michael S. Tsirkin]

Quoting r. Sean Hefty <sean.hefty at intel.com>:
> Subject: RE: [openib-general] Conflicting typedefs for "ib_gid_t"
> 
> >Yes, or ib_mad_, or ibmad_. And same for other IB_ and ib_ names there.
> >We really need to do something about names like ib_attr_t.
> 
> I like to move away from each library re-defining common IB data types.

There are not that many "common IB types". verbs and management for example
are more or less isolated. CM users mostly don't care about SMPs. etc.
What's common? GID? It does not seem worth it for a "free format 16 byte network
endianness" type.

I don't necessary see a problem with what we have.  Such defines mirror IB spec
so are static and there is no overhead maintaining them.  And this simplifies
dependencies no end - think about testing tens of dependent libraries
for breakage just 'cause you removed an used line in this
"included by everyone" header.

> Something like ibv_gid should be picked up from libibverbs.

Hmm. User might not have uverbs even loaded, so adding verbs as a dependency
to e.g. SM seems like a bad idea.

> IMO, the core of the problem is that opensm include files carry too many legacy
> typedefs.

opensm really tries to be stack-agnostic, so it does need its own
layer for things.

-- 
MST