[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[Xen-devel] Re: non-ANSI Unions



Sorry, it was an err in the tool. Such unions are now understood properly.

Anthony Liguori a écrit :
PUCCETTI Armand wrote:
Many "unions' are present in the code, but are non-ANSI!

Anonymous unions/structs are a rather common C extension. They are much preferred to using a named union for the syntactical convenience of writing:

page_info.list

vs writing:

page_info.u.list

Also, this is not the only C extension that Xen utilizes. If your analysis tool doesn't support the various GCC extensions, then it's not going to be much help.

Regards,

Anthony Liguori

For instance, I see:

struct page_info
{
   /* Each frame can be threaded onto a doubly-linked list. */
   union {
       struct list_head list;
/* Shadow uses this field as an up-pointer in lower-level shadows */
       paddr_t up;
   };
   /* Reference count and various PGC_xxx flags and fields. */
   u32 count_info;
...}

which should be written properly:

struct page_info
{
   /* Each frame can be threaded onto a doubly-linked list. */
   union {
       struct list_head list;
/* Shadow uses this field as an up-pointer in lower-level shadows */
       paddr_t up;
   } foo;

   /* Reference count and various PGC_xxx flags and fields. */
   u32 count_info;
...}

Is there any good reason to do so? Is it possible to change that, to comply with the standard
(and therefore with analysis tools too) ?

Armand




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


 


Rackspace

Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our
servers 24x7x365 and backed by RackSpace's Fanatical Support®.