On 26.11.2021 10:21, Juergen Gross wrote: > On 26.11.21 10:17, Jan Beulich wrote: >> On 26.11.2021 07:55, Juergen Gross wrote: >>> Today RING_HAS_UNCONSUMED_*() macros are returning the number of >>> unconsumed requests or responses instead of a boolean as the name of >>> the macros would imply. >>> >>> As this "feature" is already being used, rename the macros to >>> RING_NR_UNCONSUMED_*() and define the RING_HAS_UNCONSUMED_*() macros >>> by using the new RING_NR_UNCONSUMED_*() macros. In order to avoid >>> future misuse let RING_HAS_UNCONSUMED_*() really return a boolean. >> >> I don't think we can go this far; consumers of our headers may choose >> to do so, but anyone taking the headers verbatim would be at risk of >> getting screwed if they had any instance of abuse in their trees. IOW >> I think the original-name macros ought to be direct aliases of the >> new-name ones, and only in Linux'es clone you could then go further. > > Fine with me. I'm inclined to add a comment hinting at that possibility > then.
Indeed, please do. Jan
