On Sep 13, 2006, at 8:23 AM, Pete Wyckoff wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on Wed, 13 Sep 2006 01:21 -0500:
I get the following error when building the test dir from trunk, and
with mpich2 from cvs (recent). It looks like mpich2's mpicc adds -
ansi to the gcc compile line now (you can't see it in the below
output, but I verified that its there, and the error goes away if I
remove it). Not sure why they added it, but its hard to argue that
our exported headers don't need to conform to ansi C. The problem is
that there are a number of function definitions in pvfs2-util.h that
are inline static. We do this I think because those functions are
used both by the kernel module and the user space pvfs2 code, so it
saves defining them twice in separate source files. I see two
alternatives at this point: we could make them macros (ew), or we
could move the function defs to source files in both user space code
and kernel module code and give up on not replicating them. Any
other good ideas? Once this is fixed, it looks like the -ansi causes
a plethora of other bugs to be expressed in our test code. The two
big ones: use of // instead of /* */. And apparently -ansi has some
issues with bzero, snprintf, strdup, getopt...not sure what the deal
is there yet...
There's only two functions that the kernel sees in pvfs2-util.h and
they're both too big to be inlined anyway. We don't have any
shared user/kernel C files?
We don't appear to, no.
If so, they could go in there. If not,
why is the kernel even exposed to these functions in pvfs2-util.h?
It needs the PVFS2_translate_mode function at least (kernel/linux-2.6/
pvfs2-util.c calls it). Even though we don't have any shared source
files right now, I don't see any reason why we couldn't. Could the
makefile just list a relative path to a pvfs2-shared.c source file
in ../../common/misc?
-sam
Otherwise I vote for duplication as needed.
You can always use __inline__ to get around the -ansi warning, but
rather those functions would just go elsewhere.
Always good to get rid of //, bzero. The other missing functions
probably just want the right headers included.
You're right about all the other nitpicks, in my opinion.
-- Pete
_______________________________________________
Pvfs2-developers mailing list
Pvfs2-developers@beowulf-underground.org
http://www.beowulf-underground.org/mailman/listinfo/pvfs2-developers
