Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2] RFC: Automatically check xen's public headers for C++ pitfalls.

[Wei Liu <wei.liu2@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Thu, Mar 05, 2015 at 11:55:55AM +0000, Ian Campbell wrote:
> On Thu, 2015-03-05 at 11:41 +0000, Jan Beulich wrote:
> > >>> On 05.03.15 at 12:35, <ian.campbell@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > On Thu, 2015-03-05 at 12:25 +0100, Tim Deegan wrote:
> > >> At 17:28 +0100 on 26 Feb (1424968122), Tim Deegan wrote:
> > >> > BTW, ring.h is the only instance of that, so the extra diff to clear
> > >> > that up too is pretty small (see below).
> > >> > 
> > >> > Not sure what people think about that though - it might be
> > >> > quite a PITA for downstream users of it, though they ought really to
> > >> > be using local copies so they can update in a controlled way.
> > >> 
> > >> So I've seen four responses in favour of just renaming the field
> > >> (Andrew Cooper, Razvan Cojocaru, Don Slutz and David Vrabel) and one
> > >> in favour of #ifdeffing it so it's only renamed in C++ (Jan Beulich).
> > >> I really don't like adding more #ifdefs to an already hard-to-read
> > >> file; I'd rather just rename the field, or else leaving it alone and
> > >> letting C++ users carry the fixup in their own code.
> > >> 
> > >> CC'ing the other "THE REST" maintainers for their opinions.
> > > 
> > > Rather than ifdefs for C++, don't we need them based on
> > > __XEN_INTERFACE_VERSION__?
> > 
> > That's not applicable to the stuff under public/io/.
> 
> In which case I'd certainly prefer just changing the name and getting it
> over with.
> 
> mini-os would need checking, since that's (AFAIK) the only intree user
> of these headers. (Probably now that it is split out it ought to do as
> everything else now does and take a copy)
> 

Yes, mini-os now is just like any other Xen guests, which carries a copy
of all Xen public headers. Taking a new copy is OK.

Wei.

> Ian.

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel