Re: [edk2-devel] [PATCH] edk II C Coding Standard: Remove section 5.4.2.2 STATIC

["Chang, Abner" <abner.chang@amd.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 6023 bytes --]

[AMD Official Use Only - General]

Hi Ray and Mike,
Besides removing 5.4.2.2.1 and 5.4.2.2.2,  the "static" should be also removed from 5.6.1.2 section title.  I just went back to check the comment of BZ1766 and yes we can add the recommendation of using static.  Just having it in 5.4.2.2. 
Will send the patch update.
Thanks
Abner

> -----Original Message-----
> From: devel@edk2.groups.io <devel@edk2.groups.io> On Behalf Of Michael
> D Kinney via groups.io
> Sent: Wednesday, November 23, 2022 12:32 AM
> To: Chang, Abner <Abner.Chang@amd.com>; Ni, Ray <ray.ni@intel.com>;
> devel@edk2.groups.io; Gao, Liming <gaoliming@byosoft.com.cn>
> Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] [PATCH] edk II C Coding Standard: Remove section
> 5.4.2.2 STATIC
> 
> Caution: This message originated from an External Source. Use proper
> caution when opening attachments, clicking links, or responding.
> 
> 
> Hi Abner,
> 
> Removing that section 5.4.2.2 is required to close this bug.
> 
> Meaning of 'static' is covered by the ANSI C standards.
> 
> Use of 'static' for non-public variable/functions in EDK II libraries/modules is
> recommended.
> 
> However, it is not required.  It is recommended to reduce chances of symbol
> conflicts at link time.  Current approach is if a link failure occurs for multiply
> defined symbols and those are non-public symbols, the 'static' attribute can
> be applied to the non-public symbols in the components that generated the
> link failure.
> 
> It may be good to mention this recommendation in the CSS.
> 
> I will let you decide when this recommendation needs to be added to CSS.
> 
> Mike
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Chang, Abner <Abner.Chang@amd.com>
> > Sent: Monday, November 21, 2022 10:08 PM
> > To: Ni, Ray <ray.ni@intel.com>; devel@edk2.groups.io; Kinney, Michael
> > D <michael.d.kinney@intel.com>; Gao, Liming
> <gaoliming@byosoft.com.cn>
> > Subject: RE: [edk2-devel] [PATCH] edk II C Coding Standard: Remove
> > section 5.4.2.2 STATIC
> >
> > [AMD Official Use Only - General]
> >
> > Hi Ray,
> > From the last week edk2 Bug triage meeting, my understanding from Mike
> > was to remove the entire 5.4.2.2 section and no need to add anything
> because we already mention at the beginning in CCS to follow C dialect.
> >
> > @Kinney, Michael D and @Liming Gao, is that correct?
> > Abner
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Ni, Ray <ray.ni@intel.com>
> > > Sent: Tuesday, November 22, 2022 1:48 PM
> > > To: devel@edk2.groups.io; Chang, Abner <Abner.Chang@amd.com>
> > > Cc: Kinney, Michael D <michael.d.kinney@intel.com>
> > > Subject: RE: [edk2-devel] [PATCH] edk II C Coding Standard: Remove
> > > section
> > > 5.4.2.2 STATIC
> > >
> > > Caution: This message originated from an External Source. Use proper
> > > caution when opening attachments, clicking links, or responding.
> > >
> > >
> > > Abner,
> > > From what I read, the idea of BZ1766 is to add recommendations to
> > > use static for local symbols.
> > >
> > > "Add recommendations to the EDK II C Coding Standards Specification
> > > to use 'static' for all functions and global variables that are not
> > > referenced outside the current C file."
> > >
> > > Do you want to capture that in the EDKII C Coding Standard?
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Ray
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: devel@edk2.groups.io <devel@edk2.groups.io> On Behalf Of
> > > > Chang, Abner via groups.io
> > > > Sent: Tuesday, November 22, 2022 12:47 PM
> > > > To: devel@edk2.groups.io
> > > > Cc: Ni, Ray <ray.ni@intel.com>; Kinney, Michael D
> > > > <michael.d.kinney@intel.com>
> > > > Subject: [edk2-devel] [PATCH] edk II C Coding Standard: Remove
> > > > section
> > > > 5.4.2.2 STATIC
> > > >
> > > > From: Abner Chang <abner.chang@amd.com>
> > > >
> > > > BZ #1766
> > > >
> > > > Remove the entire 5.4.2.2 section.
> > > > We are not allowed to use upper-case STATIC in the source file now.
> > > > Just follow C standard and use the lower-case 'static'.
> > > >
> > > > Leave the macro "#deifne STATIC static" there without removing it
> > > > to keep the backward compatable.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Abner Chang <abner.chang@amd.com>
> > > > Cc: Ray Ni <ray.ni@intel.com>
> > > > Cc: Michael D Kinney <michael.d.kinney@intel.com>
> > > > ---
> > > >  5_source_files/54_code_file_structure.md | 16 ----------------
> > > >  1 file changed, 16 deletions(-)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/5_source_files/54_code_file_structure.md
> > > > b/5_source_files/54_code_file_structure.md
> > > > index 0c4d6a2..9acc620 100644
> > > > --- a/5_source_files/54_code_file_structure.md
> > > > +++ b/5_source_files/54_code_file_structure.md
> > > > @@ -267,19 +267,3 @@ specified in Section 5.4.1.3 "Compile-Time
> Names".
> > > >  Thus, while it might be legal C, do **not** declare external
> > > > variables anywhere  other than at the top level of a file as
> > > > specified by this document.
> > > >
> > > > -#### 5.4.2.2 Static
> > > > -
> > > > -An object declared `STATIC` has either file or block scope.
> > > > -
> > > > -##### 5.4.2.2.1 Do not reuse an object or function identifier
> > > > with static storage duration.
> > > > -
> > > > -Throughout the set of source files defined within a single .inf
> > > > file, do not -reuse an identifier with static storage duration.
> > > > The compiler may not be -confused by this, but the user may
> > > > confuse unrelated variables with the same -name.
> > > > -
> > > > -##### 5.4.2.2.2 Functions should not be declared STATIC.
> > > > -
> > > > -Some source-level debuggers are unable to resolve static functions.
> > > > Until it -can be verified that no one is dependent upon a debugger
> > > > with this limitation, -it is strongly recommended that functions
> > > > not be declared static.
> > > > --
> > > > 2.37.1.windows.1
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 

[-- Attachment #2: winmail.dat --]
[-- Type: application/ms-tnef, Size: 20285 bytes --]