'static inline' vs macros for kernel functions ? (was how to handle name clashes in linux/freebsd kernel sources ?)

This is related to the post attached at the end of this email.

In this commit:

CVS log for src/sys/sys/systm.h
Revision 1.252: download - view: text, markup, annotated - select for diffs
Fri Mar 9 22:41:01 2007 UTC (3 months, 2 weeks ago) by jhb

msleep() changed from a function to a macro wrapping _sleep().

Being a macro, it is a lot harder to hide it in case of name clashes
such as the one mentioned below.

This raises the question - what is the point in using macros
in cases like this where we could use static inline function and
probably even exploit better compiler checks ?

Would it be possible to revert msleep() to a real function ?

cheers
luigi

On Tue, Jun 26, 2007 at 04:07:58AM -0700, Luigi Rizzo wrote:
hi,
as part of the linux-kmod-compat code, and also SoC-KVM work,
we are integrating some linux kernel source code with FreeBSD source,
and there are a number of clashes in names (macros, functions, etc.)
used in different ways in the two camps.

Any ideas on how to handle the conflict ? As a temporary workaround we
added a _compat suffix (in the source code) to the linux names,
but this is of course undesirable, especially for widely used names.

E.g. take these two examples:

msleep() - used to be a function in FreeBSD 6.x, but now it is a macro

when it was a function we could make the linux source do the following
#include <sys/systm.h> // bring in the prototype
#define msleep linux_msleep // override for linux source
// now reinclusion of sys/systm.h won't give problems
and then implement the linux function. However this breaks with
FreeBSD macros that call msleep, because they will be expanded using
linux msleep.

With the macro version, we have not found a solution yet.

list manipulation macros
these have the same names on linux and FreeBSD, but different
arguments, so they are not compatible. Here the redefinition through
a macro won't even work.

So... any ideas on how to handle this, short of renaming the linux
macros ?

cheers
luigi
_______________________________________________
freebsd-current@xxxxxxxxxxx mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxx"

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Future of IT in Lebanon
    ... IT industry to target, and given the numbers out there, I would say that for the desktop, Windows will continue to blow Linux away, so between the two, I would pick Windows, and yes, Linux for the desktop remains an experiment. ... Open Source can be for Windows, Linux, etc. ... So, when you record a macro, it simply records the keystrokes. ...
    (soc.culture.lebanon)
  • Re: Use macro parameter in string; Find type definition
    ... I am new to linux and all the type definitions are driving me mad. ... When a type name is actually a macro, ... int main { ...
    (comp.lang.c)
  • Re: Two Click disassembly/reassembly
    ... I had in mind to run the Linux version of this through Jeff Owens' "asmsrc", just to see what it would do. ... Macro called in file "rhbottle.hla" at line 115 ... Index size must be an unsigned value greater than or equal to zero. ...
    (alt.lang.asm)
  • Re: MASM32 vs NASM
    ... > like invoke and others, as wells as win32 libraries. ... > only use Linux and i would rather continue doing it. ... find macro files that do pretty much what you want. ...
    (alt.lang.asm)
  • Re: static inline vs macros for kernel functions ? (was how to handle name clashes in linux/freebsd
    ... msleep() changed from a function to a macro wrapping _sleep. ... Being a macro, it is a lot harder to hide it in case of name clashes ...
    (freebsd-current)