On Sat, Mar 03, 2012 at 11:46:01PM +1100, Graeme Russ wrote:
Perhaps the macro could be expanded to include a prototype for the function,
How so - Can you provide a code example?
Sure, since all the functions are int(*)(void), just something like this:
+#define INIT_FUNC(fn, init_name, deps) \ + static int ##fn (void); \ + static const char __init_func_ ## fn[] __used \ + __attribute__((__section__(".initfuncs"))) = \ + "(" #fn ":" #init_name ";" #deps ")\n";
(I'm guessing static is OK for this use case?).
The patch overall looks like it will make it a lot simpler to understand and change the sequence initialisation functions are called, which is a very good thing. I'm just mindful of getting easy-to-diagnose error messages back when things go wrong.
An example:
static int f1(int x) { return x + 1; }
#define INIT_FUNC(fn) \ static void fn(int)
INIT_FUNC(f1);
gcc immediately throws the following error:
t2.c:9: error: conflicting types for ‘f1’ t2.c:1: note: previous definition of ‘f1’ was here
which is pretty clear.
Bye for now,