Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] HACKING: remove bogus restrictions

["Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>]

On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 06:27:59PM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 28 August 2012 18:21, Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com> wrote:
> > We are talking about stuff like __kvm_pv_eoi - so the chance is exactly 0.
> > And if it does happen then you run a simple script and fix
> > this one instance.
> 
> Why not just use a name that doesn't use a double underscore
> in the first place? The C standard specifically allows single
> underscore + lowercase to give things other than the implementation
> part of the underscore-namespace. In this case, "_kvm_pv_eoi"
> would be OK.

BTW this is exactly what v2 of my patch did but Blue Swirl nacked this too.

> >> The tiny single benefit from violating the rules would be that you
> >> could use a few additional possible classes of prefixes, in addition
> >> to the infinite combinations already available.
> >
> > Benefit would be consistency with existing QEMU code
> > which has both _t __  and _X, and consistency
> > within HACKING itself.
> 
> HACKING and CODING_STYLE contain a number of rules which
> the existing codebase doesn't fully conform to. The idea
> is to incrementally improve consistency and correctness.
> 
> -- PMM

How about fixing HACKING itself? It recommends using ram_addr_t.