On Sun, Nov 06, 2011 at 07:22:51AM -0800, m...@freebsd.org wrote: > On Sun, Nov 6, 2011 at 4:43 AM, Kostik Belousov <kostik...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Regarding the _vm_page_lock() vs. vm_page_lock_func(), the mutex.h has > > a lot of violations in regard of the namespaces, IMO. The __* namespace > > is reserved for the language implementation, so our freestanding program > > (kernel) ignores the requirements of the C standard with the names like > > __mtx_lock_spin(). Using the name _vm_page_lock() is valid, but makes > > it not unreasonable for other developers to introduce reserved names. > > So I decided to use the suffixes. vm_map.h locking is free of these > > violations. > > I'm pretty sure that when the C standard says, "the implementation", > they're referring to the compiler and OS it runs on. Which makes the > FreeBSD kernel part of "the implementation", which is precisely why so > many headers have defines that start with __ and then, if certain > posix defines are set, also uses non-__ versions of the name.
For libc providing parts, required by standard, you are right. But our kernel is a freestanding program using a compiler, so in-kernel uses of the reserved namespace is a violation.
pgp4CGtNzn8lW.pgp
Description: PGP signature
