On Fri, Jun 26, 2020 at 2:06 PM Jerin Jacob <jerinjac...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 26, 2020 at 5:13 PM David Marchand > <david.march...@redhat.com> wrote: > > > > On Fri, Jun 26, 2020 at 1:16 PM Jerin Jacob <jerinjac...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > Alternative is to keep variable declaration outside, > > > > > as David suggested, and I tend to agree that it is a > > > > > bit better. Macro name says 'register'. It is not > > > > > 'declare and register'. Also it avoids static-vs-extern > > > > > problem completely. The solution allows to keep the > > > > > variable declaration untouched and put constructor (macro) > > > > > at the end of fine where constructors typically reside. > > > > > > > > My only concern with that approach is that, We can not save a lot of > > > > code duplication > > > > with that scheme. ie. it is [1] vs [2]. We can change the MACRO name > > > > accordingly if that is a concern. Any suggestions? > > > > > > > > Let me know your preference on [1] vs [2], I will stick with for the > > > > next version. > > > > > > If there are no other comments, I change RTE_LOG_REGISTER to static > > > version > > > and RTE_LOG_REGISTER_EXTERN for a non-static version and send the next > > > version. > > > > - Having a macro that does more than what its name tells is inconvenient. > > I agree. What could be that name if we want to declare and register? > RTE_LOG_DECLARE_AND_REGISTER_EXTERN?
No declaration in macro. -- David Marchand
