Hello Gregory,
The question is more about should we populate it to missing places, or just
keep as is until someone complains (hopefully should never happen).
I'm asking it because automounter structures are equipped with CODE, but
all the FS structures are not and that seems very inconsistent to me. I
mean I can't find a use case with usage of automounter without FS.
Best regards,
Petro
On Wed, Jan 26, 2022, 8:56 PM Gregory Nutt <spudan...@gmail.com> wrote:
> It is required for any CPU architecture that has asymmetry in code and data
> space addresses.
>
> It is a bad idea to remove it. There is no benefit to remonving it and
> there is most certainly a downside.
>
> On Wed, Jan 26, 2022 at 7:06 AM Petro Karashchenko <
> petro.karashche...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Hello team,
> >
> > Recently I noticed that some structures in common code use CODE
> > keyword for pointers to functions and some do not, so I have the
> > question: is CODE keyword still supported?
> > Here are few examples:
> > struct automount_lower_s
> > {
> > ...
> > CODE int (*attach)(FAR const struct automount_lower_s *lower,
> > automount_handler_t isr, FAR void *arg);
> > CODE void (*enable)(FAR const struct automount_lower_s *lower,
> > bool enable);
> > CODE bool (*inserted)(FAR const struct automount_lower_s *lower);
> > };
> > vs
> > struct file_operations
> > {
> > int (*open)(FAR struct file *filep);
> > int (*close)(FAR struct file *filep);
> > ssize_t (*read)(FAR struct file *filep, FAR char *buffer, size_t
> buflen);
> > ssize_t (*write)(FAR struct file *filep, FAR const char *buffer,
> > size_t buflen);
> > off_t (*seek)(FAR struct file *filep, off_t offset, int whence);
> > int (*ioctl)(FAR struct file *filep, int cmd, unsigned long arg);
> >
> > /* The two structures need not be common after this point */
> >
> > int (*poll)(FAR struct file *filep, struct pollfd *fds, bool
> setup);
> > #ifndef CONFIG_DISABLE_PSEUDOFS_OPERATIONS
> > int (*unlink)(FAR struct inode *inode);
> > #endif
> > };
> >
> > Will appreciate your feedback.
> >
> > Best regards,
> > Petro
> >
>
