On 04/05/2018 03:25 PM, Philippe Gerum wrote:
> On 04/05/2018 01:39 PM, Giulio Moro wrote:
>> Thanks and sorry for overlooking that. I thought if there was some docs on 
>> xeno-config it would have been inlined in its source, so that is where I 
>> looked for it. I guess the man folder should have been a more obvious choice.
>> Is it correct that calling `xeno-config --skin cobalt` expects you to call, 
>> POSIX functions prefixed with `__wrap_` ? Does this mean that the *actual* 
>> "Cobalt POSIX interface" consists of __wrap_fn() calls as opposed to fn() 
>> calls?
> __RT(fn()) and __COBALT(fn()) hide this ugly __wrap prefix inside an
> ugly macro. __STD() keeps consistent with such ugliness for __real calls.
>> If yes,  is this documented somewhere obvious?
>  I kind of figured this out over time by reading
> http://xenomai.org/2014/08/porting-a-linux-application-to-xenomai-dual-kernel/
>  and looking at the wrappers files and at the source code, but is it
> stated clearly somewhere?
> Of course not. Proper documentation hinders fruitful imagination.
>> This is a place where I would have looked for that, for instance: 
>> http://www.xenomai.org/documentation/xenomai-3/html/xeno3prm/group__cobalt__api.html
>>  .
> Makes sense, added to my todo list. This is part of a larger
> documentation work.

This commit is an attempt to clarify the matter of symbol wrapping:



Xenomai mailing list

Reply via email to