27 Mar
2011
27 Mar
'11
9:37 p.m.
From: Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo(a)gnumonks.org>
This patch is a RFC, I can add the prefix osmocom_ to all functions
in libosmocore to fix with the existing namespace pollution.
This task was proposed by Harald.
Let me know if you are OK with this approach and I'll send a
patchset along this week.
---
include/osmocom/core/backtrace.h | 2 +-
src/backtrace.c | 2 +-
2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/include/osmocom/core/backtrace.h b/include/osmocom/core/backtrace.h
index bbbb2c2..7c248aa 100644
--- a/include/osmocom/core/backtrace.h
+++ b/include/osmocom/core/backtrace.h
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
#ifndef _OSMO_BACKTRACE_H_
#define _OSMO_BACKTRACE_H_
-void generate_backtrace();
+void osmocom_generate_backtrace();
#endif
diff --git a/src/backtrace.c b/src/backtrace.c
index ecd6b9c..5c609bb 100644
--- a/src/backtrace.c
+++ b/src/backtrace.c
@@ -29,7 +29,7 @@
#ifdef HAVE_EXECINFO_H
#include <execinfo.h>
-void generate_backtrace()
+void osmocom_generate_backtrace()
{
int i, nptrs;
void *buffer[100];
--
1.7.2.3
27 Mar
27 Mar
10:16 p.m.
New subject: [PATCH] [RFC] src: add prefix osmocom_ to all functions in libosmocore
Hi,
This patch is a RFC, I can add the prefix osmocom_ to
all functions
in libosmocore to fix with the existing namespace pollution.
Well, use osmo_ not osmocom_ (that's what's used at several places already).
Second, I wouldn't say _all_ ...
I mean when there is already a prefix, I see no point adding another
(things like msgb_, vty_, bitvec_, log_, gsmtap_, rsl_, gsm48_ ...).
For things that are too generic, like 'generate_backtrace'
or 'plugin_load_all', then sure.
Sylvain
10:20 p.m.
New subject: [PATCH] [RFC] src: add prefix osmocom_ to all functions in libosmocore
Hi Pablo,
On Sun, Mar 27, 2011 at 09:37:54PM +0200, pablo(a)gnumonks.org wrote:
This patch is a RFC, I can add the prefix osmocom_ to
all functions
in libosmocore to fix with the existing namespace pollution.
I think 'osmocom_' is too long. 'osmo_' should be better. And yes,
generally it would make sense to prefix most functions.
Exceptions:
* libosmovty should have a common vty_ prefix, but not osmo.
* for libosmovty we should probably simply limit the number of exported
symbols. There is e.g. all the buffer_*() and vector_*() use internally,
but there is no need to globally export all those symbols.
* no osmo_ prefix for msgb_* and tlv_*, as they are used everywhere
* no prefix for talloc
* bitvec_* -> osmo_bv_*
* bsc_*_timer -> osmo_timer_*
* *_signal_* -> osmo_signal_*
Let me know if you are OK with this approach and
I'll send a
patchset along this week.
I think it's great. Once the namespace is cleaned up, I think we can head
for a 1.0 release of the libraries.
--
- Harald Welte <laforge(a)gnumonks.org> http://laforge.gnumonks.org/
============================================================================
"Privacy in residential applications is a desirable marketing option."
(ETSI EN 300 175-7 Ch. A6)
28 Mar
28 Mar
4:40 p.m.
New subject: [PATCH] [RFC] src: add prefix osmocom_ to all functions in libosmocore
Hi!
On 27/03/11 22:20, Harald Welte wrote:
those are good news.
BTW, do you plan to maintain a stable ABI along releases for libraries?
Another proposition: it may be a good idea to use some EXPORT_SYMBOL()
macro, similar to what we use in the Linux kernel, to explicit tell what
symbols of the library are exported.
We use this in libmnl:
http://git.netfilter.org/cgi-bin/gitweb.cgi?p=libmnl.git;a=summary
Hi Pablo,
On Sun, Mar 27, 2011 at 09:37:54PM +0200, pablo(a)gnumonks.org wrote:
thanks for the feedback!
This patch is a RFC, I can add the prefix
osmocom_ to all functions
in libosmocore to fix with the existing namespace pollution.
I think 'osmocom_' is too long. 'osmo_' should be better. And yes,
generally it would make sense to prefix most functions.
Exceptions:
* libosmovty should have a common vty_ prefix, but not osmo.
* for libosmovty we should probably simply limit the number of exported
symbols. There is e.g. all the buffer_*() and vector_*() use internally,
but there is no need to globally export all those symbols.
* no osmo_ prefix for msgb_* and tlv_*, as they are used everywhere
* no prefix for talloc
* bitvec_* -> osmo_bv_*
* bsc_*_timer -> osmo_timer_*
* *_signal_* -> osmo_signal_* Let me know if
you are OK with this approach and I'll send a
patchset along this week.
I think it's great. Once the namespace is cleaned up, I think we can head
for a 1.0 release of the libraries.
5:28 p.m.
New subject: [PATCH] [RFC] src: add prefix osmocom_ to all functions in libosmocore
Hi Pablo,
On Mon, Mar 28, 2011 at 04:40:08PM +0200, Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote:
those are good news.
BTW, do you plan to maintain a stable ABI along releases for libraries?
that's the idea once we have the namespace pollution fixed and release a 1.0
Let me know if you are OK with this approach and
I'll send a
patchset along this week.
I think it's great. Once the namespace is cleaned up, I think we can head
for a 1.0 release of the libraries. Another proposition: it may be a good idea to use some
EXPORT_SYMBOL()
macro, similar to what we use in the Linux kernel, to explicit tell what
symbols of the library are exported.
I think it makes sense, indeed. Feel free to work on a patch, after
the namespace conversion has been done. Also, don't forget the wireshark
dissector related work (which I think is more important).
Thanks,
Harald
--
- Harald Welte <laforge(a)gnumonks.org> http://laforge.gnumonks.org/
============================================================================
"Privacy in residential applications is a desirable marketing option."
(ETSI EN 300 175-7 Ch. A6)
5:27 p.m.
New subject: [PATCH] [RFC] src: add prefix osmocom_ to all functions in libosmocore
Some minor questions:
On 27/03/11 22:20, Harald Welte wrote:
Exceptions:
* libosmovty should have a common vty_ prefix, but not osmo.
* for libosmovty we should probably simply limit the number of exported
symbols. There is e.g. all the buffer_*() and vector_*() use internally,
but there is no need to globally export all those symbols.
* no osmo_ prefix for msgb_* and tlv_*, as they are used everywhere
* no prefix for talloc
* bitvec_* -> osmo_bv_*
enum bit_value -> enum osmo_bit_value
struct bitvec -> struct osmo_bitvec
* bsc_*_timer -> osmo_timer_*
there are some inconsistencies in the API naming in the timer bits:
bsc_add_timer(...)
bsc_timer_pending(...)
I can put the timer postfix in the end, so it looks consistent.
struct timer_list should be struct osmo_timer_list, right?
* *_signal_* -> osmo_signal_*
Is there any plan to remove the static lists inside the library?
I can make this in follow up patches. This would require more testing
since it's not a simple renaming.
8 p.m.
New subject: [PATCH] [RFC] src: add prefix osmocom_ to all functions in libosmocore
Hi Pablo,
On Mon, Mar 28, 2011 at 05:27:42PM +0200, Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote:
no, I don't have such plans, and I don't think it is neccessarry. The
signalling system is not intended to have multiple instances. There is
one in every process, that's it.
Regards,
Harald
--
- Harald Welte <laforge(a)gnumonks.org> http://laforge.gnumonks.org/
============================================================================
"Privacy in residential applications is a desirable marketing option."
(ETSI EN 300 175-7 Ch. A6)
Some minor questions:
On 27/03/11 22:20, Harald Welte wrote:
both fine with me. I think Sylvain wanted to be a bit less 'aggressive'
with renaming, but the point is: We're breaking the API anyway, so we
might as well do it properly once and hopefully not have to care about
it in the future.
Exceptions:
* libosmovty should have a common vty_ prefix, but not osmo.
* for libosmovty we should probably simply limit the number of exported
symbols. There is e.g. all the buffer_*() and vector_*() use internally,
but there is no need to globally export all those symbols.
* no osmo_ prefix for msgb_* and tlv_*, as they are used everywhere
* no prefix for talloc
* bitvec_* -> osmo_bv_*
enum bit_value -> enum osmo_bit_value
struct bitvec -> struct osmo_bitvec there are some inconsistencies in the API naming in
the timer bits:
bsc_add_timer(...)
bsc_timer_pending(...)
I can put the timer postfix in the end, so it looks consistent.
I think it should all be called osmo_timer_* for consistency.
struct timer_list should be struct osmo_timer_list,
right?
ACK.
* *_signal_*
-> osmo_signal_*
Is there any plan to remove the static lists inside the library?
4785
days inactive
4786
days old
6 comments
4 participants
participants (4)
-
246tnt＠gmail.com -
Harald Welte -
Pablo Neira Ayuso -
pablo＠gnumonks.org