Date: Thu, 22 Apr 1999 19:28:10 +1000 From: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au> To: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG, tomdean@ix.netcom.com Subject: Re: LINT Question Message-ID: <199904220928.TAA07800@godzilla.zeta.org.au>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>LINT has two versions of values for ports. One is in quotes and the >other is not. > >For example, > >device npx0 at nexus? port IO_NPX iosiz 0x0 flags 0x0 irq 13 >device sio0 at isa? port "IO_COM1" tty flags 0x10 irq 4 > >The definition of IO_NPX and IO_COM1 have the same form in >sys/isa/isareg.h, sys/i386/isa/isa.h, etc. > >Some time back, someone posted guidance like "if it contains letters >and numbers, quote it, otherwise don't." More precisely, quote if it contains multiple tokens and multiple tokens are not wanted, otherwise don't. `IO_COM1' contains 2 tokens, `IO_COM' and `1' so not quoting would give the same syntax error as `port IO_COM 1'. >Which form should be used for these values? Follow the rule. >LINT shows ppc0 as a device and 'man ppc' says it is a controller. I >believe earlier versions of LINT had ppc as a controller. Which is >correct? `controller' was correct, but it didn't matter. new-bus may change this. >sio1 is not in LINT, but it is in GENERIC. Some devices like fd have >both fd0 and fd1. Since two serial ports is common should LINT have >sio1? Newer machines are more likely to have two serial ports than >two floppy drives. LINT is not supposed to show all devices. It is for testing that all code at least compiles. It needs to show sio1 as much as it needs to show sio65535 (not). Bruce To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199904220928.TAA07800>