From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124])
	by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D046A0A0C;
	Mon, 28 Jun 2021 16:33:20 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9FCF440692;
	Mon, 28 Jun 2021 16:33:19 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from linux.microsoft.com (linux.microsoft.com [13.77.154.182])
 by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1DE7C4068A
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Mon, 28 Jun 2021 16:33:18 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by linux.microsoft.com (Postfix, from userid 1086)
 id 6733420B6C50; Mon, 28 Jun 2021 07:33:17 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 linux.microsoft.com 6733420B6C50
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linux.microsoft.com;
 s=default; t=1624890797;
 bh=K8hB1pnYX1Xf50DA48ABhspbfmvJprcZIPJ0v4XlNVI=;
 h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From;
 b=lme/tCBlBUBOkFUfEnHFWX1Pq4YkCBH2qn0HhWHbqWzDEsnqX+ka7OWcikwY3Gd26
 2mg3pwFTjkzM2bGaRUI4/VWq1LzgLPObjnOAAfXGtMaSAW9GrzdRpZh5nd/8D0j6H8
 ol11Hf3zrw40SVbs1Byl6cRWw88xtuEqPxdzZm48=
Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2021 07:33:17 -0700
From: Tyler Retzlaff <roretzla@linux.microsoft.com>
To: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
Cc: dev@dpdk.org, ferruh.yigit@intel.com, dmitry.kozliuk@gmail.com,
 david.marchand@redhat.com
Message-ID: <20210628143317.GC28256@linuxonhyperv3.guj3yctzbm1etfxqx2vob5hsef.xx.internal.cloudapp.net>
References: <20210623182657.GA24634@linuxonhyperv3.guj3yctzbm1etfxqx2vob5hsef.xx.internal.cloudapp.net>
 <3277479.bKIgzLV6lZ@thomas>
 <20210624160228.GB22718@linuxonhyperv3.guj3yctzbm1etfxqx2vob5hsef.xx.internal.cloudapp.net>
 <2661083.m9YJQ7Gqa3@thomas>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <2661083.m9YJQ7Gqa3@thomas>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC] toolchain specific macro expansion
X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org
Sender: "dev" <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>

On Thu, Jun 24, 2021 at 06:29:20PM +0200, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> 24/06/2021 18:02, Tyler Retzlaff:
> > On Thu, Jun 24, 2021 at 08:54:49AM +0200, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> > > 23/06/2021 20:26, Tyler Retzlaff:
> > > > // lib/eal/gcc/rte_toolchain_common.h
> > > > #define __rte_noreturn __attribute__((noreturn))
> > > 
> > > We should keep a macro in rte_common.h which triggers an explicit error
> > 
> > i think that's relatively trivial to do. rte_common.h could after
> > toolchain specific include do a simple test.
> > 
> > #ifndef __rte_no_return
> > #error no __rte_no_return defined for toolchain
> > #endif
> 
> No I was thinking of:
> 
> /** Doxygen comment for the attribute below */
> #define __rte_no_return RTE_ATTR_NOT_SUPPORTED

oh, didn't know about this. it sounds better.

> 
> This way we have a documentation in a single place for the macro,
> and compilation fails if it is not implemented for the toolchain.

yes, i was thinking about this.  i'm glad you suggested it because
a signle source of documentation in rte_common.h would be better than
having to maintain redundant copies.