From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wg0-f50.google.com (mail-wg0-f50.google.com [74.125.82.50]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E0D5C682E for ; Thu, 28 Aug 2014 10:51:52 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-wg0-f50.google.com with SMTP id x12so424342wgg.33 for ; Thu, 28 Aug 2014 01:56:01 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:organization :user-agent:in-reply-to:references:mime-version :content-transfer-encoding:content-type; bh=fHCmJbwHAUfw1LntIhqRxKkrN2DzEQKtoemE4bRB9GU=; b=gwgAGPfE660wf5eZXMQENnAww3twurrBw2nvS3k4/b39SSN5BNXw9BlasqaLOLVQiJ FijAX5vejVUvzo7yApKNXw44HFtpbYtQGIoPda5++lA908fIm5FMZO84+WPFQxDFzzBO X9LhUNqykeLwjL6J144qrbiqjjIe1uLoK5+3jivVg83zw7VluK8SW2JGO9vn5zf4dX0Y thTd5Vgn+F4X5rg6bp/HoNtHnyJrTSJtTEsZI8NMq+SZpeX8346AeSRKO1CRPfV4ZRUP iW/HEmMy2C8/GKsu6D4PpRxVWKGWFHEGFyJXVIVEZS0a3Nj4/eM/Z1UqTfv55s2x+T8X 3y1w== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQlOChm+KWpl8M5IfA2G5o9iy0owUv1clhJC5iWhwefYhxDfUhuqFe7WVgu1d8Qnw7CXhrTX X-Received: by 10.194.47.208 with SMTP id f16mr1143396wjn.130.1409216161116; Thu, 28 Aug 2014 01:56:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from xps13.localnet (guy78-3-82-239-227-177.fbx.proxad.net. [82.239.227.177]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id xn15sm33295238wib.13.2014.08.28.01.55.59 for (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 28 Aug 2014 01:56:00 -0700 (PDT) From: Thomas Monjalon To: "Wu, Jingjing" Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2014 10:55:55 +0200 Message-ID: <7302306.qBW1xKV0E1@xps13> Organization: 6WIND User-Agent: KMail/4.13.3 (Linux/3.15.8-1-ARCH; KDE/4.13.3; x86_64; ; ) In-Reply-To: <9BB6961774997848B5B42BEC655768F8ADBF1D@SHSMSX104.ccr.corp.intel.com> References: <1409105634-29980-1-git-send-email-jingjing.wu@intel.com> <9091956.EmWA3cIqCF@xps13> <9BB6961774997848B5B42BEC655768F8ADBF1D@SHSMSX104.ccr.corp.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Cc: dev@dpdk.org Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 5/7] fix the Marco conflict X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2014 08:51:53 -0000 2014-08-28 03:39, Wu, Jingjing: > Because these macros such as IPPROTO_TCP, IPPROTO_UDP are already > defined in . If user's application include > and rte_ip.h at the same time, there will be conflict error, for > example cmdline.c in testpmd. Yes > I remember there was someone also raised this issue few month ago. Yes, and the question was: "should we totally remove these definitions"? I think yes. > So just use the way "#ifndef #endif" to avoid the conflict. But you didn't explain difference between _NETINET_IN_H and _NETINET_IN_H_. > And it is exactly workaround as you said. Yes, it's a workaround. If rte_ip.h is included before netinet/in.h, I think there is still a problem. -- Thomas