[lkml]   [2012]   [Jan]   [4]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [PATCH] Use __unused0 instead of __unused for user visible struct member names
    On Tue, 2012-01-03 at 07:56:59 +0100, Sam Ravnborg wrote:
    > On Mon, Jan 02, 2012 at 02:22:43PM -0600, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
    > > Guillem Jover wrote:
    > > > On BSD systems __unused has traditionally been defined to mean the
    > > > equivalent of gcc's __attribute__((__unused__)), some parts of the
    > > > Linux tree use that convention too (e.g. perf). The problem comes when
    > > > defining such macro while trying to build unmodified source code with
    > > > BSD origins on systems with Linux headers.
    > > >
    > > > Rename the user visible struct members from __unused to __unused0 to
    > > > not cause compilation failures due to that macro, which should not be
    > > > a problem as those members are supposed to be private anyway.
    > ^__ is reserved for libc internal stuff and there is no reason to
    > name the unused/padding members "__unused".
    > So one or a set of patches that rename them all to something more
    > sensible would be fine.

    On a quick glance, I've found other functionally similar struct
    member names present on the tree:

    __unused __unusedN __reserved __reservedN __reserved_N __resN
    __pad __padN __flr_pad __ifi_pad __tcpm_padN __tcpct_padN

    Do you mean you'd like to see patch(es) to rename all those? I'd not
    mind providing them, although my immediate concern right now is just
    regarding __unused.

    There's also __buf in linux/sem.h and __data in linux/socket.h, but
    I'd rather not thouch those, as I'd expect to be users for them?


     \ /
      Last update: 2012-01-04 09:17    [W:0.019 / U:7.888 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site