Hi Pedro, There are 3 different include guard names for ProcessorBind.h file. AArch64/Arm/Ebc/Ia32/X64 use __PROCESSOR_BIND_H__ (start/end with 2 underscore characters). RISCV64 uses PROCESSOR_BIND_H__ (end with 2 underscore) LoongArch64 uses PROCESSOR_BIND_H_ (end with 1 underscore)
From the code rule of uniform style, I think it is also a necessary change to same include guard name. If you still think we shouldn't have the change, I am okay to close this patch. Thanks. Best regards, Gavin -----Original Message----- From: Pedro Falcato <pedro.falc...@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, July 4, 2023 1:02 AM To: devel@edk2.groups.io; Kinney, Michael D <michael.d.kin...@intel.com> Cc: Xue, Gavin <gavin....@intel.com>; suni...@ventanamicro.com; Warkentin, Andrei <andrei.warken...@intel.com>; Wang, Yimin <yimin.w...@intel.com>; Sheng, Alan <alan.sh...@intel.com> Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] [edk2 PATCH] MdePkg: Use same ProcessorBind symbol define for RISCV64 On Fri, Jun 30, 2023 at 5:59 PM Michael D Kinney <michael.d.kin...@intel.com> wrote: > > Using the same include guard define name is preferred. > > Why was anything other than that considered? I don't see the point of making the include guard an actual part of the "API". Consumers should not depend on it being named $WHATEVER. That is a hack. Include guards are an implementation detail and making that stable actively stops you from doing things like using #pragma once or fixing the __DOUBLE_UNDERSCORE_H__ stuff. So I would vote for not changing this, downstream consumers that rely on __PROCESSOR_BIND_H__ should be fixed, downstream. -- Pedro -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#106655): https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/106655 Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/99567569/21656 Group Owner: devel+ow...@edk2.groups.io Unsubscribe: https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/unsub [arch...@mail-archive.com] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
