Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 12 Mar 2012 12:18:02 +1100 (EST)
From:      Bruce Evans <brde@optusnet.com.au>
To:        Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org>
Cc:        freebsd-arch@freebsd.org, Robert Millan <rmh@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: [PATCH] Add compatibility <sys/io.h>
Message-ID:  <20120312120436.H1098@besplex.bde.org>
In-Reply-To: <CAJ-VmomsZs=P%2BOpGO5UOLcg7Da4wy0hTccF8k63WChRMVjiOvg@mail.gmail.com>
References:  <CAOfDtXPGPP0reN9NTBw_5%2BNwXZ56Yy0oyx_fH%2BDOvmpc1O%2BQdQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAJ-Vmonu_ApSd192cjvsW6k3eNNK4Kz=MmAMe_e=zmwbrS8Ayw@mail.gmail.com> <CAOfDtXOCyjga5QHz98Re3jXkefNzB-MbULcAVUQH89ToVLkw9g@mail.gmail.com> <CAJ-VmomsZs=P%2BOpGO5UOLcg7Da4wy0hTccF8k63WChRMVjiOvg@mail.gmail.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, 11 Mar 2012, Adrian Chadd wrote:

> I agree we should move them out of the namespace. I'd even suggest
> prefixing them with something BSD specific, as two underscores may not
> be enough of a hint.

No, they are already outside of the user namespace.  cpufunc.h is a
kernel header that just happens to be abusable in userland.  Though
I originally intended it to be usable in userland.  2 underscores
would make any use undefined, but no more than most uses already are.

> That requires some sweeping changes of userland code, but I think it's
> for the best.

This would be mostly churn in the downwards direction.

I just checked the API in old DOS compilers.  In Turbo C it is:

     #include <dos.h>
     void outportb(int portid, unsigned char value);

     [outportb is normally a macro that expands to an inline asm function.]

So there is no conflict with this API, since its name is different.

Bruce



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20120312120436.H1098>