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.

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

Move libultra functions and variables to libultra headers #1468

Open
wants to merge 6 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

Thar0
Copy link
Contributor

@Thar0 Thar0 commented Dec 18, 2022

Not totally happy with this, since macros.h and the new stack.h are not libultra headers but are still used in some libultra files for now, however this is the bulk of the changes and further improvements will inevitably be found.

@Dragorn421
Copy link
Collaborator

Not sure where to start reviewing but I noticed FLT_MAX -> MAXFLOAT, the former being C-standard (I think), the latter coming from where?

@Thar0
Copy link
Contributor Author

Thar0 commented Dec 19, 2022

In the three MIPS cross compilers I have installed (mips-linux-gnu-, well-known, mips64-ultra-elf-, glank's toolchain, mips64-elf-, libdragon toolchain) I cannot find the definition FLT_MAX, only MAXFLOAT in math.h.

Supposedly FLT_MAX is in float.h, an ISO C99 header, however I can't find a physical copy of such a header (I'd love to know where it is)
It seems MAXFLOAT is not strictly ISO C, it's an "extension", but it seems sufficiently widely adopted?

Comment on lines +101 to +102
INC := -Iinclude -Iinclude/libc -Isrc -Ibuild -I.
build/src/libultra/%.o: INC := -Iinclude/libc -Iinclude/ultra64 -Isrc/libultra
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I can't say I'm a fan of the include path not being the same throughout the repo

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think it's just more correct than using ultra64/... paths in libultra files, and libultra files ideally shouldn't see any headers from the base include dir (although unfortunately as I mentioned I still couldn't get rid of two headers yet)
It may be better if we moved src/libultra to say lib/libultra with it's own makefile or something, but that's a bit too far of a departure from what I wanted to achieve for now (but I think doing this later may be good)

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yeah I understand the appeal when looking at libultra specifically/separately and I agree libultra should be completely cut off from the rest, my beef is mostly/only that it's confusing when navigating the repo

It would be nice to document this somewhere other than "self-documenting" in the Makefile. I wouldn't be opposed to a README file in src/libultra and include/libultra but idk if that would be a popular suggestion

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Also I'm starting with criticism but I should also congratulate you on a job well done, it's nice to see header cleanup and this looks quite involved FeelsOKMan

@@ -1,11 +1,10 @@
#include "global.h"
#include "ultra64/internal.h"
#include "osint.h"
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Suggested change
#include "osint.h"
#include "internal.h"

(This is the least-stuff-inside meaningful header, right?)

@@ -34,4 +37,12 @@
#define VINTR(v) v
#define HSTART START
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Should the OSViMode related macros be in vi.h instead ?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I'm hesitant to do this since we know what should be in vi.h (os_vi.h), but we don't have a reference viint.h so we can put just about whatever we like in there.

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Forgetting about the original headers, I think it makes more sense for them to be with the OSViMode definition,
but I'll leave it up to you and the "follow the original headers" stance

@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
#include "global.h"
#include "guint.h"
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Suggested change
#include "guint.h"
#include "gu.h"

Note I don't know what you're going for with includes

I assume they should be minimal?
But for example would a

#include "guint.h"

->

#include "ultratypes.h"
#include "gu.h"

be better if something didn't need what guint.h itself contains?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I've mostly been using the *int headers for each libultra module, since I believe that's how it was originally based on mdebug includes, but maybe a more minimal approach is just better idk. Though note that as I mention below the minimal set of includes must also contain the prototype for the functions in the file, not just the necessary external declarations that the function(s) uses.

@@ -1,4 +1,5 @@
#include "global.h"
#include "rcp.h"
#include "rdp.h"
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Suggested change
#include "rdp.h"

?
and dpgetstat

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

rdp.h contains the prototype for osDpSetStatus, the header containing the prototype needs to be included so the compiler can warn/error if the prototype does not match the function itself

@Dragorn421
Copy link
Collaborator

Very interesting last set of changes!
What is the future you envision for explicit-width "ultratypes" s32 & co ? What should use int & co "natives" instead, or not? (does that make sense)

@Thar0
Copy link
Contributor Author

Thar0 commented Dec 25, 2022

So far I've only been removing the ultratypes from libc files/functions, since libc shouldn't know anything about libultra. Otherwise I have no current plans to start removing them elsewhere

Comment on lines +6 to +7
#define OS_DCACHE_ROUNDUP_ADDR(x) (void*)(((((u32)(x) + 0xf) / 0x10) * 0x10))
#define OS_DCACHE_ROUNDUP_SIZE(x) (u32)(((((u32)(x) + 0xf) / 0x10) * 0x10))
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Suggested change
#define OS_DCACHE_ROUNDUP_ADDR(x) (void*)(((((u32)(x) + 0xf) / 0x10) * 0x10))
#define OS_DCACHE_ROUNDUP_SIZE(x) (u32)(((((u32)(x) + 0xf) / 0x10) * 0x10))
#define OS_DCACHE_ROUNDUP_ADDR(x) (void*)(((((u32)(x) + 0xF) / 0x10) * 0x10))
#define OS_DCACHE_ROUNDUP_SIZE(x) (u32)(((((u32)(x) + 0xF) / 0x10) * 0x10))

Comment on lines +6 to +8
u32 osAiGetLength(void);
s32 osAiSetFrequency(u32);
s32 osAiSetNextBuffer(void*, u32);
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Curious was it deliberate to leave out the arg names here, and just use types?

#define GU_PI 3.1415926

#define ROUND(x) (s32)(((x) >= 0.0) ? ((x) + 0.5) : ((x) - 0.5))

void guMtxIdent(Mtx*);
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Relating to the arg question again, some functions here have arg names and some don't. Any particular reason why?

@fig02 fig02 added the Waiting for author There are requested changes that have not been addressed label Jan 2, 2023

// Static/compile-time assertions

#if defined(__GNUC__) || (__STDC_VERSION__ >= 201112L)
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Wouldn't just

Suggested change
#if defined(__GNUC__) || (__STDC_VERSION__ >= 201112L)
#if (__STDC_VERSION__ >= 201112L)

be enough / make more sense? (unless gcc did have the macro way before C11)

#ifndef ISVIEWER_H
#define ISVIEWER_H

#include "ultra64.h"
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Should this include be in the .c only? It's not needed by the .h, I think

Comment on lines 308 to +311
// Load cart callback set by __osSetHWIntrRoutine
lui $t1, %hi(__osHwIntTable)
addiu $t1, %lo(__osHwIntTable)
lw $t2, (OS_INTR_CART*HWINT_SIZE+HWINT_CALLBACK)($t1)
lw $t2, (OS_INTR_CART*HWINT_SIZE+HWINT_HANDLER)($t1)
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

since HWINT_CALLBACK -> HWINT_HANDLER , should references to "callback" in sentences be changed too?

Comment on lines -2 to 3
#include "global.h"
#include "internal.h"

s32 osAfterPreNMI(void) {
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

So per the comment about includes #1468 (comment)
should this include system.h ? (with the osAfterPreNMI prototype)

The same kind of comment seems to apply to other files

Comment on lines +8 to +10
void bzero(void* __s, size_t __n);
int bcmp(const void* __sl, const void* __s2, size_t __n);
void bcopy(const void* __src, void* __dest, size_t __n);
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

The original libultra headers use int instead of size_t. Why deviate from the original headers here?
Also, why the __ prefix on the arguments?

@ariahiro64
Copy link
Contributor

idk what this entails but theres also the "modern n64 sdk" which includes the entirety of libultra. the legality is murky at best.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Waiting for author There are requested changes that have not been addressed
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

6 participants