From: Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@domain.hid>
To: Philippe Gerum <rpm@xenomai.org>
Cc: xenomai@xenomai.org
Subject: Re: [Xenomai-core] Allow "break" statement in RTDM_EXECUTE_ATOMICALLY()
Date: Mon, 18 May 2009 10:31:19 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4A111CD7.4050206@domain.hid> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1242572097.17138.57.camel@domain.hid>
Philippe Gerum wrote:
> Jan,
>
> Would you consider allowing "break" for leaving an atomic code block as
> illustrated below?
>
> I understand this would create a potential issue with newer RTDM drivers
> relying on this feature when backported to former RTDM implementations,
> but only having if/else constructs to control the execution flow within
> an atomic block may be painful sometimes and lead to uselessly hairy
> code, especially for error handling.
> Maybe adding another helper macro with the desired behavior, and
> documenting it separately from RTDM_EXECUTE_ATOMICALLY() would mitigate
> the portability issue?
>
> Additionally, I would definitely shadow/hide the spl value from the code
> block in a way or another, since using "s" as a socket identifier for
> RTDM-based protocol drivers is not that unusual.
I agree that "s" requires better encapsulation, that a do-while is a
good approach for this, and I would even change its name to something
like __rtdm_s.
But I don't think we should officially support "break" here (even if it
happens to work after refactoring). The macro does not expose explicit
"{ }" to the reader of the code that makes use of it (in contrast to
LIST_FOR_EACH-like helpers e.g.). Better use "goto" here, which is quite
common for error cleanup, too.
>
> e.g.
>
> diff --git a/include/rtdm/rtdm_driver.h b/include/rtdm/rtdm_driver.h
> index 058a9f8..18b6001 100644
> --- a/include/rtdm/rtdm_driver.h
> +++ b/include/rtdm/rtdm_driver.h
> @@ -595,14 +595,16 @@ int rtdm_select_bind(int fd, rtdm_selector_t *selector,
> <LEAVE_ATOMIC_SECTION> \
> }
> #else /* This is how it really works */
> -#define RTDM_EXECUTE_ATOMICALLY(code_block) \
> -{ \
> +#define RTDM_ATOMIC_BLOCK(code_block) \
> +do { \
> spl_t s; \
> - \
> xnlock_get_irqsave(&nklock, s); \
> - code_block; \
> + do { \
> + code_block; \
> + } while(0); \
> xnlock_put_irqrestore(&nklock, s); \
> -}
> +} while(0)
> +#define RTDM_EXECUTE_ATOMICALLY(code_block) RTDM_ATOMIC_BLOCK(code_block)
> #endif
> /** @} Global Lock across Scheduler Invocation */
>
Jan
--
Siemens AG, Corporate Technology, CT SE 2
Corporate Competence Center Embedded Linux
prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-05-18 8:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-05-17 14:54 [Xenomai-core] Allow "break" statement in RTDM_EXECUTE_ATOMICALLY() Philippe Gerum
2009-05-18 8:31 ` Jan Kiszka [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4A111CD7.4050206@domain.hid \
--to=jan.kiszka@domain.hid \
--cc=rpm@xenomai.org \
--cc=xenomai@xenomai.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.