On Wednesday, May 04, 2016 03:58:40 AM Bruce Evans wrote: > On Tue, 3 May 2016, John Baldwin wrote: > > > On Tuesday, May 03, 2016 03:52:56 PM Bruce Evans wrote: > >> On Mon, 2 May 2016, Pedro Giffuni wrote: > >... > >>> TBH, I thought so too, but I avoided applying such changes to headers, > >>> and I haven't touched _bitset.h, > >> > >> _foo.h headers cannot use howmany() due to namespace pollution. > >> > >> _bitset.h was already broken, unless it is supposed to be kernel-only -- > >> it uses howmany(). It is kernel-only according to its documention -- > >> bitset is only documented in kernel manpages (in a single unreadable one > >> than is linked ad nauseum). > > > > cpuset.h is used in userland for cpuset_getaffinity(2), etc. > > > >> It is otherwise fairly clean. It defines the symbols BITSET_DEFINE, > >> BITSET_T_INITIALIZER, and BITSET_SET in the application namespace > >> This is not completely clean for a _foo.h header. All other BITSET* > >> macros are already in bitset.h I think only BITSET_DEFINE should be > >> in _bitset.h (for use declarations in other headers). > >> > >> select.h avoids this problem by defining its own howmany() macro. This > >> seems to be correct except for the bogus ifdef around the private macro. > >> This ifdef is a little more than a style bug (verboseness) -- it breaks > >> detection of other definitions that might be different. Lexical > >> differences wouldn't matter, but it is easier to never have them. > >> > >> Old versions of select polluted <sys.types.h>. The select macros just > >> used howmany(). howmany() was in <sys/types.h> too. > > > > I would be happy to fix _bitset.h and _cpuset.h to not need sys/param.h. > > However, they also use NBBY which is defined in sys/param.h. _sigset.h > > gets around this because it uses an array of uint32_t and hardcodes a > > shift count of 5 in _SIG_WORD() and a mask of 31 in _SIG_BIT(). If you > > think it is fine to hardcode '8' instead of 'NBBY' I'll do that. Hmm, > > sys/select.h hardcodes '8' for _NFDBITS, so I guess that is fine. > > NBBY can be cleaned up too. I rather like it, but it is bogus in C90 > since it is spelled CHAR_BIT there, and it is now more bogus in POSIX > since POSIX started specifying 8-bit bytes in 2001. Thus 8 is the > correct spelling of it in the implementation where you don't want to > expose a macro that makes it clearer what this magic 8 is.
Ok. > BTW, I don't like select's and bitset's use of longs. Using unsigned > for select is a historical mistake. Bitset apparently copied select > except it unimproved to signed long. Bitstring uses unsigned char with > no optimizations. Sigset uses uint32_t with no obvious optimizations, > but compilers do a good job with with it due to its fixed size. I doubt > that the manual optimization of using a wider size is important. I agree, but cpuset_t is already part of the ABI in existing releases. :( Changing it to uint32_t would break the ABI for big-endian platforms. -- John Baldwin _______________________________________________ svn-src-head@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/svn-src-head To unsubscribe, send any mail to "svn-src-head-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
