[ofw] [PATCH] add missing items from OFED ib_types.h - required by OpenSM 3.2.2

Smith, Stan stan.smith at intel.com
Tue Oct 13 17:34:30 PDT 2009


Welcome to the party!

Fab Tillier wrote:
> Hi Stan,
>
> Stan C. Smith wrote on Tue, 13 Oct 2009 at 16:52:42:
>
>>
>> Let the discussions begin:
>>
>> 1) 'static inline' vs/ AL_INLINE ?
>
> AL_INLINE allows an inline function to be exported by a DLL so that
> if the compiler doesn't inline the function, there exists still a
> valid DLL export for it.
>
> Static inline doesn't do the same thing.  I suspect that making these
> functions all static inline would not significantly affect the size
> of executables.  Most binaries don't reference them anyhow.

It was not clear due to the number of AL_INLINED functions as to whether these 'new' functions wanted to be AL_INLINE or not. After examining AL_INLINE I figured it exported the function via .dll but was not clear if that superseded the inline qualifier. Thanks for the clarification.
Given the new inline functions are only accessed by opensm, static inline seems like the 'right' way to go.

Once opensm 3.2.2 is fully functional, we should embark on splitting out various items from ib_types.h as it has grown to be a kitchen sink.

>
>> 2) New ib_port_info_t fields; additional driver mods.
>> 3) ?
>
> Is the goal here to merge the opensm ib_types.h so that opensm can
> simply reference the one in inc/iba?  Or will we continue to have
> multiple versions of ib_types.h (one private to OpenSM, the other for
> everyone else?)

The idea is to use only inc\iba\ib_types.h; one stop shopping.
That said, the previous comment on the weight loss program for inc\iba\ib_types.h is the end goal.

>
> Thanks,
> -Fab




More information about the ofw mailing list