Date: Sun, 6 Nov 2011 18:42:04 +0200 From: Kostik Belousov <kostikbel@gmail.com> To: mdf@freebsd.org Cc: "K. Macy" <kmacy@freebsd.org>, Alan Cox <alc@rice.edu>, Andriy Gapon <avg@freebsd.org>, freebsd-current@freebsd.org, Benjamin Kaduk <kaduk@mit.edu>, Penta Upa <bsdboot@gmail.com> Subject: Re: vm_page_t related KBI [Was: Re: panic at vm_page_wire with FreeBSD 9.0 Beta 3] Message-ID: <20111106164204.GY50300@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua> In-Reply-To: <CAMBSHm-Egy53818aKTpiPBA22RxqTAyQv0q8PsFUnPPDjt1cBQ@mail.gmail.com> References: <4EB40015.5040100@rice.edu> <20111104153004.GK50300@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua> <4EB4095D.3030303@rice.edu> <20111104160339.GM50300@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua> <20111105141306.GW50300@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua> <CAMBSHm86TaJnRRgmPA_t7tiPfQsPyoTqz3ymdHSY1H3t5G864Q@mail.gmail.com> <20111105151530.GX50300@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua> <4EB595FA.4020500@rice.edu> <20111106124331.GP50300@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua> <CAMBSHm-Egy53818aKTpiPBA22RxqTAyQv0q8PsFUnPPDjt1cBQ@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--IUUPtLpdNqNE81UU Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sun, Nov 06, 2011 at 07:22:51AM -0800, mdf@freebsd.org wrote: > On Sun, Nov 6, 2011 at 4:43 AM, Kostik Belousov <kostikbel@gmail.com> wro= te: > > Regarding the _vm_page_lock() vs. vm_page_lock_func(), the mutex.h has > > a lot of violations in regard of the namespaces, IMO. The __* namespace > > is reserved for the language implementation, so our freestanding program > > (kernel) ignores the requirements of the C standard with the names like > > __mtx_lock_spin(). Using the name _vm_page_lock() is valid, but makes > > it not unreasonable for other developers to introduce reserved names. > > So I decided to use the suffixes. vm_map.h locking is free of these > > violations. >=20 > I'm pretty sure that when the C standard says, "the implementation", > they're referring to the compiler and OS it runs on. Which makes the > FreeBSD kernel part of "the implementation", which is precisely why so > many headers have defines that start with __ and then, if certain > posix defines are set, also uses non-__ versions of the name. For libc providing parts, required by standard, you are right. But our kernel is a freestanding program using a compiler, so in-kernel uses of the reserved namespace is a violation. --IUUPtLpdNqNE81UU Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.18 (FreeBSD) iEYEARECAAYFAk62uNsACgkQC3+MBN1Mb4gqpQCfQdG7yhZaVm0lbGb75HOrT0jJ YQAAoN1NhUXeIIzgUP2IXY/JRoZQq/MX =nf9h -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --IUUPtLpdNqNE81UU--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20111106164204.GY50300>