From: David Chatterton <chatz@melbourne.sgi.com>
To: Russell Cattelan <cattelan@thebarn.com>
Cc: David Chinner <dgc@sgi.com>, Tim Shimmin <tes@sgi.com>,
Eric Sandeen <sandeen@sandeen.net>,
xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] Make stuff static
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2006 13:16:17 +1100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4563B2F1.6040603@melbourne.sgi.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1164157783.19915.46.camel@xenon.msp.redhat.com>
Russell Cattelan wrote:
> On Wed, 2006-11-22 at 11:42 +1100, David Chinner wrote:
>> On Tue, Oct 17, 2006 at 05:45:31PM -0500, Russell Cattelan wrote:
>>> On Wed, 2006-10-18 at 07:57 +1000, David Chinner wrote:
>>>> On Tue, Oct 17, 2006 at 05:13:01PM +1000, Tim Shimmin wrote:
>>>>> I thought that for debug, we could stop them from being inline
>>>>> for easier debugging. We could have a STATIC_INLINE :-)
>>>> We could, but I don't think it gains us anything.
>>> I agree with Tim on this.
>>> when I see STATIC in the code it's generally assumed to
>>> be a way to toggle of static on/off. Adding static inline
>>> to the #define STATIC starts to overload the the macro
>>> and creates an obfuscation that isn't immediately obvious.
>>> STATIC_INLINE should be fairly obvious.
>> Ok, so I've had time to look at this again. Here's the definitions
>> of STATIC and STATIC_INLINE for debug and nondebug from the
>> patch (whitespace damaged):
>>
>> Index: 2.6.x-xfs-new/fs/xfs/support/debug.h
>> ===================================================================
>> --- 2.6.x-xfs-new.orig/fs/xfs/support/debug.h 2006-11-22 10:54:37.089984780 +1100
>> +++ 2.6.x-xfs-new/fs/xfs/support/debug.h 2006-11-22 11:30:20.433326839 +1100
>> @@ -38,13 +38,37 @@ extern void assfail(char *expr, char *f,
>>
>> #ifndef DEBUG
>> # define ASSERT(expr) ((void)0)
>> -#else
>> +
>> +#ifndef STATIC
>> +# define STATIC static noinline
>> +#endif
>> +
>> +#ifndef STATIC_INLINE
>> +# define STATIC_INLINE static inline
>> +#endif
>> +
>> +#else /* DEBUG */
>> +
>> # define ASSERT(expr) ASSERT_ALWAYS(expr)
>> extern unsigned long random(void);
>> -#endif
>>
>> #ifndef STATIC
>> -# define STATIC static
>> +# define STATIC noinline
>> +#endif
>> +
>> +/*
>> + * We stop inlining of inline functions in debug mode.
>> + * Unfortunately, this means static inline in header files
>> + * get multiple definitions, so they need to remain static.
>> + * This then gives tonnes of warnings about unused but defined
>> + * functions, so we need to add the unused attribute to prevent
>> + * these spurious warnings.
>> + */
>> +#ifndef STATIC_INLINE
>> +# define STATIC_INLINE static __attribute__ ((unused)) noinline
>> #endif
>>
>> +#endif /* DEBUG */
>> +
>> +
>> #endif /* __XFS_SUPPORT_DEBUG_H__ */
>>
>> ------
>>
>> Is this acceptible to everyone?
> Yup.
>
>> FWIW, there is one other thing that this conversion causes
>> problems with, and that's variable definitions. i.e. we can't
>> use STATIC on them any more because of the "noinline" attribute
>> it has. Do we care about this and if so, any suggestions on
>> how to keep this functionality (a different STATIC_xxx define
>> for structures)?
> So I know things like systemtap kgdb oprofile all work better when
> functions are not static, but what about variables/structures?
> do things really get that confused?
> Maybe we shouldn't worry about conditioning them and just make them
> static
>
I agree with Russell, is there a case for not defining a structure static?
I can't think of one, unless it kdb/lcrash is going to work better if they are
not static in a debug build. Otherwise, we should just use "static" and not
"STATIC". Some for static file variables.
David
--
David Chatterton
XFS Engineering Manager
SGI Australia
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-11-22 2:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-09-29 3:28 [PATCH 1/2] Make stuff static sandeen
2006-10-14 4:31 ` Eric Sandeen
2006-10-16 9:12 ` Timothy Shimmin
2006-10-16 13:49 ` Eric Sandeen
2006-10-16 21:34 ` Eric Sandeen
2006-10-16 23:22 ` David Chinner
2006-10-16 23:55 ` Russell Cattelan
2006-10-17 0:50 ` David Chinner
2006-10-17 1:03 ` Eric Sandeen
2006-10-17 3:09 ` David Chinner
2006-10-17 3:18 ` Nathan Scott
2006-10-18 0:56 ` David Chinner
2006-10-17 7:13 ` Tim Shimmin
2006-10-17 21:57 ` David Chinner
2006-10-17 22:45 ` Russell Cattelan
2006-11-22 0:42 ` David Chinner
2006-11-22 1:09 ` Russell Cattelan
2006-11-22 2:16 ` David Chatterton [this message]
2006-11-22 4:24 ` David Chinner
2006-11-22 4:53 ` David Chatterton
2006-11-22 16:13 ` Eric Sandeen
2006-11-29 7:31 ` David Chinner
2006-11-26 14:05 ` Eric Sandeen
2006-10-18 4:06 ` Timothy Shimmin
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=4563B2F1.6040603@melbourne.sgi.com \
--to=chatz@melbourne.sgi.com \
--cc=cattelan@thebarn.com \
--cc=dgc@sgi.com \
--cc=sandeen@sandeen.net \
--cc=tes@sgi.com \
--cc=xfs@oss.sgi.com \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox