* Jiri Slaby <jsl...@suse.cz> wrote:
> SYM_LOCAL_ALIAS_START -- use where there are two local names for one code
> SYM_ALIAS_START -- use where there are two global names for one code
> SYM_LOCAL_FUNC_START -- use for local functions
> SYM_FUNCTION_START -- use for global functions
> SYM_WEAK_FUNC_START -- use for weak functions
> SYM_ALIAS_END -- the end of LOCALALIASed or ALIASed code
> SYM_FUNCTION_END -- the end of SYM_LOCAL_FUNC_START, SYM_FUNCTION_START,
> SYM_WEAK_FUNC_START, ...
> SYM_DATA_START -- global data symbol
> SYM_DATA_END -- the end of SYM_DATA_START symbol
This looks mostly good to me, with minor details:
- The mixed 'FUNC' and 'FUNCTION' naming looks a bit confusing - I'd pick one
and
use that consistently.
- I'd also make the START/END constructs look more symmetric, i.e. make the
attribute a postfix, not a prefix.
- In fact I'd make the 'alias' notion an attribute as well - what matters
mostly
is that it's a function symbol, and that fact is lost from the SYM_ALIAS
naming.
I.e. something like this:
SYM_FUNCTION_START
SYM_FUNCTION_START_WEAK
SYM_FUNCTION_START_LOCAL
SYM_FUNCTION_START_ALIAS
SYM_FUNCTION_START_LOCAL_ALIAS
...
SYM_FUNCTION_END
SYM_DATA_START
SYM_DATA_END
Note how simple and structured looking the nomenclature is when grouped in such
a
way, how easy it is to verify at a glance, and how easy it is to extend with
new
postfixes.
( In theory we could also make the attributes a real macro argument in the
future,
should the number of attributes increase significantly. )
Does this look good to everyone?
Thanks,
Ingo
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
