discussion related to ipc.h

[Joel Sherrill]

No need to put discussion in the subject. As Gedare pointed out, all email
threads are discussions by definition. ;)

On Wed, Mar 25, 2020 at 1:32 PM Eshan Dhawan <eshandhawan51 at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hello everyone,
>
> I went through the implementation of sys/ipc.h in various platforms.
> From FreeBSD, it is difficult to implement file as warned by Joel.
> but then I went through musl implementation
> it is easy to comprehend
> But it has a kind of architecture-specific implementation.
>
> FreeBSD
> > ipc.h : https://github.com/freebsd/freebsd/blob/master/sys/sys/ipc.h
> > ftok.c:
> https://github.com/freebsd/freebsd/blob/master/lib/libc/gen/ftok.c
> musl
> > https://git.musl-libc.org/cgit/musl/tree/src/ipc
> https://git.musl-libc.org/cgit/musl/tree/include/sys/ipc.h
> and a ipc.h file , ipcstat.h in arch/MACHINE/bits
> Generic
> https://git.musl-libc.org/cgit/musl/tree/arch/generic/bits/ipc.h
> https://git.musl-libc.org/cgit/musl/tree/arch/generic/bits/ipcstat.h
>
> ipcstat.h has a different value for every arch.
>

On closer reading, ftok() support without the other IPC mechanisms makes
no sense.  I would push this one way way down the list -- like stay as far
away from ipc.h as you can this summer. :)

--joel

>
> thanks
> eshan
> _______________________________________________
> devel mailing list
> devel at rtems.org
> http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.rtems.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20200325/53496ca7/attachment.html>