posix: Add headers related to BSD Sockets API #17346
Conversation
Provide POSIX headers for BSD Sockets API. Signed-off-by: Paul Sokolovsky <[email protected]>
|
|
||
| #include <net/socket.h> | ||
|
|
||
| static inline char *inet_ntop(sa_family_t family, const void *src, char *dst, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
shouldn't sa_family_t and any other structures needed here be also defined in this namespace rather than in zephyr specific headers under include/net/?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
All of zsock_* functions come from net/socket.h together with sa_family_t, to me this looks just fine.
|
I am wondering if we should just put those files directly into include/, there is really nothing that relates them to whatever we have inside include/posix which is implemented in lib/posix and just covers parts of PSE52 profile |
No, we shouldn't. It should go where the other POSIX headers went. One sweet day, we'll switch them around - all POSIX headers will go under include/, and all Zephyr - under include/zephyr/. We're definitely not ready to that any time soon. |
that one sweet day will not come, we already spent too much time on cleaning up include/ and we should not start adding new technical debt that would need to be resolved later. Since you agree the above is actually the end-goal, this and other changes related to headers and additions to include/ need some more thought and longevity. We should not merge this just to satisfy some short term goals. This and other changes related to headers need to be discussed in one of the upcoming project meetings.
We already decided not to go this route. This case is closed. |
nashif
left a comment
nashif
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
-1 until further discussion is done in the dev-review meeting.
|
If we are not merging this, then we need to revert #16557. I will prepare a PR for that. |
|
Closing this as agreed on dev meeting. I will re-open #17362 and rework it a bit (adding one more revert there). |
I missed this "agreement". The summary of the dev meeting from my PoV is: @nashif reiterated his generic concern of "what if, what if, putting these headers under include/posix/ is wrong?". No specific concerns were raised. The whole matter appears to be about "let's think this up more, because what if, what if we've been doing it all wrong all this time, and need to do it differently now". No specific proposals beyond dumping POSIX headers straight into include/, despite the fact that existing POSIX headers are in include/posix/. No specific pro/cons analysis, only a hunch that "what if it was all wrong all this time, and we don't want to do redo it later, so let's drop any work and start thinking how to not make it so we redo it again later". So, from my PoV, it's blocked on further, more complete proposals and their discussions. |
We've been putting POSIX headers in
This PR does improve some points of #16621 which some reviewers found problematic. #16621 isn't supposed to be closed, as it contains very important fixes and developments for POSIX subsystem. As #16621 may take some time to be elaborated, this PR tries to resolve at least some issues, by going for compromise of merging just subset of #16621 changes. Thanks for stepping up to prepare it, and I don't see reasons for it to be closed. Most importantly, #17706 was posted, which contains the relevant information regarding POSIX subsys further development, which hopefully should unblock further progress with these patches. Reopening. |
|
Closing in favor of the original PR as its now in sync with not having empty files. |
10 participants
Provide POSIX headers for BSD Sockets API.
Signed-off-by: Paul Sokolovsky [email protected]
This contains the relevant code from #16621 except the empty header files as TSC does not want those in the system.