[SSSD] [PATCH] Rename SAFEALIGN macros

Jakub Hrozek jhrozek at redhat.com
Tue May 14 16:29:44 UTC 2013


On Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 02:36:40PM +0200, Michal Židek wrote:
> On 04/26/2013 10:21 AM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> >On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 07:17:20PM -0400, Simo Sorce wrote:
> >>On Fri, 2013-04-26 at 00:51 +0200, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> >>>On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 03:41:28PM +0200, Michal Židek wrote:
> >>>>https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/1772
> >>>>
> >>>>Changes done:
> >>>>- definitions of safealign macros have been removed from
> >>>>src/sss_client/sss_cli.h and src/util/util.h and put into new header
> >>>>(the old headers include this new header). This change was done to
> >>>>avoid code duplication.
> >>>>
> >>>>- Macros that copy bytes from a variable to byte buffer have been
> >>>>renamed from SAFEALIGN_SET_<type> to SAFEALIGN_VAR2BUF_<type>.
> >>>>
> >>>>- Macros that copy bytes from a byte buffer to a variable have been
> >>>>renamed from SAFEALIGN_COPY_<type> to SAFEALIGN_BUF2VAR_<type>
> >>>>
> >>>>- Aliases have been added to allow the old names to be used in the
> >>>>code (we can remove the aliases when the old names are replaced with
> >>>>the new ones on all places in the code, but for now, it is good to
> >>>>allow both alternatives, so that this patch can be smaller)
> >>>>
> >>>>Thanks
> >>>>Michal
> >>>
> >>>You need to add the new header to dist_noinst_HEADERS in Makefile.am
> >>>otherwise you break make distcheck.
> >>>
> >>>Also, I was thinking about how we create the headers for consumption in
> >>>both server and the client -- would it be a good idea to differentiate
> >>>them on the filesystem level so that it's immediatelly clear that this
> >>>header is special?
> >>
> >>I agree this is important.
> >>The header was put in sss_client to make crystal clear this header need
> >>to stay slim and can't grow dependencies and cruft as the client library
> >>needs to stay minimal.
> >>
> >
> >I think the code is minimal, it's just macros.
> >
> >>In moving this header we need a way to maintain this notion.
> >>
> >>>I see two options:
> >>>     a) create a new subdirectory, something like src/shared (better name
> >>>     welcome) that would contain the code shared between server and client
> >>>     b) use some kind of prefix in the filename such as cs_header.h
> >>
> >>We already have another header in util/ in the same situation.
> >>At the time we opted for adding a prominent comment in the header file
> >>(option c).
> >>We can do the same here, or we can decide to go with a)
> >
> >That's what Michal did, the comment was there.
> >
> >The only thing I was afraid of was that someone would navigate with ctags
> >into middle of the file and wouldn't see the comment on top. Then again,
> >this is something a code review should catch, too.
> 
> I agree. I filed a ticket to track this issue:
> https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/1898
> 
> For now I would go with the warning message at the beginning of the header.
> The above ticket can be fixed later for all shared headers at once.
> 
> New patch attached.
> 
> Thanks
> Michal

Ack.




More information about the sssd-devel mailing list