[dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 01/18] eal: introduce dtor macros

[Neil Horman]

On Wed, Mar 21, 2018 at 06:15:22PM +0100, Gaetan Rivet wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Gaetan Rivet <gaetan.rivet at 6wind.com>
> ---
>  lib/librte_eal/common/include/rte_common.h | 23 +++++++++++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 23 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/lib/librte_eal/common/include/rte_common.h b/lib/librte_eal/common/include/rte_common.h
> index c7803e41c..500fc3adb 100644
> --- a/lib/librte_eal/common/include/rte_common.h
> +++ b/lib/librte_eal/common/include/rte_common.h
> @@ -105,6 +105,29 @@ static void __attribute__((constructor, used)) func(void)
>  static void __attribute__((constructor(prio), used)) func(void)
>  
>  /**
> + * Run after main() with high priority.
> + *
> + * The destructor will be run *before* prioritized destructors.
> + *
> + * @param func
> + *   Destructor function name.
> + */
> +#define RTE_FINI(func) \
> +static void __attribute__((destructor, used)) func(void)
> +
> +/**
> + * Run after main() with low priority.
> + *
> + * @param func
> + *   Destructor function name.
> + * @param prio
> + *   Priority number must be above 100.
> + *   Lowest number is the last to run.
> + */
> +#define RTE_FINI_PRIO(func, prio) \
> +static void __attribute__((destructor(prio), used)) func(void)
> +
> +/**
Additionally, it might be nice to further abstract the destructor priority to
fixed levels so that people aren't always trying to guess what the right magic
number should be.  I.e. create several destructor macros of the form:
RTE_FINI_<NAME>

Where name is a meaningfull term like FINAL, PMD, EARLY, or some such set that
implies a priority value encoded within the macro definition.  That would also
eliminate the need to create a BUILD BUG macro if the priority was specified to
be too low

Neil

>   * Force a function to be inlined
>   */
>  #define __rte_always_inline inline __attribute__((always_inline))
> -- 
> 2.11.0
> 
>