On Fri, 2006-08-18 at 14:36 +0200, Philippe Gerum wrote:
> On Fri, 2006-08-18 at 13:16 +0200, Gilles Chanteperdrix wrote:
> > Philippe Gerum wrote:
> > > I'd rather keep the number of obscure conditional macros as low as
> > > possible; we should actually try to reduce them since we have a growing
> > > number of real and pseudo-archs to support, and those macros tend to
> > > obfuscate the generic code.
> > >
> > > In the same vein, is there anything we could use in the compatible Adeos
> > > patch that would unambiguously identify the presence of such support
> > > without resorting to yet-another-macro like IPIPE_HAVE_SHARED_TIMER_IRQ?
> > We could decide that ipipe_timer_irq_p() must be implemented as a macro,
> > and use #ifdef ipipe_timer_irq_p but I thought that #ifdef
> > IPIPE_HAVE_SHARED_TIMER_IRQ was easier to understand.
> It is, but the point is that we should not define a normalized
> interface; older ARM patches are obsoleted by the very existence of the
> new one adding a required feature for PXA.
> Therefore, at some point in
> time, we are going to deprecate them, removing the conditional from the
> Xenomai codebase. In other words, this code is aimed at transitioning
> internally between two Adeos patch series, not at providing a stable
Xenomai-core mailing list