-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 127
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
[PATCH API-NEXT v4] Symbols cleanup #108
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Reviewed-by: Bill Fischofer bill.fischofer@linaro.org
This patch is straightforward, but I'm not sure I understand why it is necessary. We introduced the explicit visibility controls some time back to make is so that all symbols are hidden by default except those we explicitly mark as visible. Does this need to be extended here? |
@Bill-Fischofer-Linaro I think in case of static library our hidden things do not work. And all names have to be in .o 's inside .a so that linked will be able to link crossing symbols. |
@Bill-Fischofer-Linaro two main reasons:
|
@lumag branch has to be against master. Why is it for api-next? |
@muvarov
Because I worked on api-next. I will rebase this on top of master and
provide necessary delta for api-next (hash_proto, scalable scheduler).
|
@muvarov @Bill-Fischofer-Linaro PR updated to reflect #116 merge |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
One comment regarding style, but otherwise looks good to me.
@@ -71,6 +71,7 @@ bool rwin_reserve(reorder_window_t *rwin, uint32_t *sn) | |||
return true; | |||
} | |||
|
|||
static | |||
void rwin_insert(reorder_window_t *rwin, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The coding style of this file (and majority of code base) is to place "static" on the same line as rest of function definition. Please fix this up so that it remains consistent
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@brbrooks done
Reviewed-by: Brian Brooks brian.brooks@arm.com |
@@ -191,7 +191,7 @@ int odp_cls_capability(odp_cls_capability_t *capability) | |||
return 0; | |||
} | |||
|
|||
void _odp_cls_update_hash_proto(cos_t *cos, odp_pktin_hash_proto_t hash_proto) | |||
static void _odp_cls_update_hash_proto(cos_t *cos, odp_pktin_hash_proto_t hash_proto) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Checkpatch flags this line as being over 80 chars in len. Needs to be split to two lines.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@Bill-Fischofer-Linaro fixed
Signed-off-by: Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov <dmitry.ereminsolenikov@linaro.org>
Signed-off-by: Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov <dmitry.ereminsolenikov@linaro.org>
Signed-off-by: Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov <dmitry.ereminsolenikov@linaro.org>
Signed-off-by: Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov <dmitry.ereminsolenikov@linaro.org>
Merged. |
Several low-hanging fruits for https://bugs.linaro.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2988