Re: [Xen-devel] USB virt 2.6 split driver patch series

[harry <harry@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Tue, 2005-11-22 at 11:00 +0900, NAHieu wrote:
> On 11/22/05, NAHieu <nahieu@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > I had a look at xenidc code, and found some code like this:
> >
> > --
> > static void xenidc_endpoint_destroy_1(xenidc_callback * callback)
> > {
> >         trace();
> >
> >         {
> >                 xenidc_endpoint_callback *endpoint_callback =
> >                     container_of(callback, xenidc_endpoint_callback, 
> > callback);
> >
> >                 endpoint_callback->destroyed = 1;
> >
> >                 xenidc_work_wake_up();
> >         }
> > }
> > --
> >
> > Why name it *destroy_1? it is a common practice to name a local
> > function with _ or __ as prefix. So for example
> > xenidc_endpoint_destroy_1() should be named
> > _xenidc_endpoint_destroy_1() or __xenidc_endpoint_destroy_1()
> >
> 
> Oops, typo. I meant _xenidc_endpoint_destroy_1() should be named
> _xenidc_endpoint_destroy() or __xenidc_endpoint_destroy()
> 

This is for chains of functions which are logically part of the same
operation but are split by asynchronous callbacks. The first function is
called something: xenidc_endpoint_destroy() for example the next
xenidc_endpoint_destroy_1, the next xenidc_endpoint_destroy_2 and so on.
Leading underscores won't work past _1.  Unless you want _ then __ then
___ :-)  Also identifiers with two leading underscores are reserved by
ANSI C for the C compiler implementation so I think it's not a good idea
to use them.

Thanks

Harry.


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel