On 2014-02-12 09:43, Sebastian Huber wrote:
I'm not quite sure about the _CPU_ interfaces naming convention. I
thought in the score the CPU is the "package" and we logically
associate 'subpackages' and their methods, like _CPU_Context_xxx(),
_CPU_Exception_xxx(), etc. However, I see at least _CPU_atomic_Xxx()
violates this, so I don't know what the right way should be by looking
at the code.
Ok, if we use the rule _Package_name_Sub_package_name_Function_name, then we
should use
_CPU_Counter_Read()
We should also adjust the CPU atomic API.
Maybe we should drop the sub-packages. This would lead to
_CPU_Counter_Read() -> _CPU_Counter_read()
_CPU_Atomic_Compare_exchange_ptr() -> _CPU_Atomic_compare_exchange_ptr()
_CPU_SMP_Get_current_processor() -> _CPU_SMP_get_current_processor
--
Sebastian Huber, embedded brains GmbH
Address : Dornierstr. 4, D-82178 Puchheim, Germany
Phone : +49 89 189 47 41-16
Fax : +49 89 189 47 41-09
E-Mail : sebastian.hu...@embedded-brains.de
PGP : Public key available on request.
Diese Nachricht ist keine geschäftliche Mitteilung im Sinne des EHUG.
_______________________________________________
rtems-devel mailing list
rtems-devel@rtems.org
http://www.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/rtems-devel
