Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Rename IS_ALIGN() to SOF_IS_ALIGN() #8755

Closed
wants to merge 2 commits into from
Closed

Rename IS_ALIGN() to SOF_IS_ALIGN() #8755

Changes from 1 commit
Commits
Show all changes
2 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
789fb7f
Revert "common.h: Guard definition of IS_ALIGNED for Zephyr builds"
marc-hb Jan 17, 2024
d9cafac
Rename IS_ALIGN() to SOF_IS_ALIGN()
marc-hb Jan 17, 2024
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
6 changes: 0 additions & 6 deletions src/include/sof/common.h
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -14,14 +14,8 @@
/* callers must check/use the return value */
#define __must_check __attribute__((warn_unused_result))

#ifdef __ZEPHYR__
#include <zephyr/sys/util.h>
#endif

/* Align the number to the nearest alignment value */
#ifndef IS_ALIGNED
#define IS_ALIGNED(size, alignment) ((size) % (alignment) == 0)
#endif
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

if zephyrproject-rtos/zephyr#67243 happens to be merged before this (yes, I know that it's currently blocked) and we move to a Zephyr version after it, this would break compilation. Why not just merge these two commits?

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

we probably should hold of until we can get the Zephyr interface merged in. We have the SMP interface in flight (plus the regression), so the air is getting too thick with incompatible combinations.


/* Treat zero as a special case because it wraps around */
#define is_power_of_2(x) ((x) && !((x) & ((x) - 1)))
Expand Down