Skip to content

Conversation

lplewa
Copy link
Contributor

@lplewa lplewa commented Sep 17, 2025

No description provided.

@lplewa lplewa changed the title Ctl split The last CTL patch :) Sep 17, 2025
@lplewa lplewa force-pushed the ctl_split branch 11 times, most recently from 629b379 to 2706166 Compare September 18, 2025 14:44
@lplewa lplewa marked this pull request as ready for review September 18, 2025 15:22
@lplewa lplewa requested a review from a team as a code owner September 18, 2025 15:22
Copy link
Contributor

@lukaszstolarczuk lukaszstolarczuk left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

after all, this is super huge PR - I'd split this somehow, if easily done...

@lplewa lplewa force-pushed the ctl_split branch 2 times, most recently from 94517a8 to decb1fd Compare September 19, 2025 14:44
:type:`umf_memory_provider_handle_t` argument to reach a specific provider.
Providers can also be addressed by name through ``umf.provider.by_name.{provider}``;
append ``.{index}`` to address specific provider when multiple providers share the same label.
Defaults for future providers reside under ``umf.provider.default.{provider}`` and track the
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

not sure what you meant by ... and track the name ...

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

done

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

ohh, I see, but now there's a typo: {provider -> {provider}

@bratpiorka bratpiorka requested a review from Copilot October 8, 2025 08:37
Copy link

@Copilot Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Pull Request Overview

This PR consolidates final CTL (Control Interface) changes for version 1.0, including error code adjustments and comprehensive implementation of CTL functionality for providers and pools. The CTL system provides a hierarchical interface for configuring and querying UMF components.

Key changes:

  • Introduced new error code UMF_RESULT_ERROR_INVALID_CTL_PATH for invalid CTL paths
  • Added comprehensive CTL parameter support for disjoint pools with default overrides
  • Enhanced provider and pool initialization with post-initialization hooks
  • Added extensive test coverage and examples for CTL functionality

Reviewed Changes

Copilot reviewed 49 out of 49 changed files in this pull request and generated 4 comments.

Show a summary per file
File Description
include/umf/base.h Added new error code UMF_RESULT_ERROR_INVALID_CTL_PATH
test/utils/cpp_helpers.hpp Updated default error return from UMF_RESULT_ERROR_UNKNOWN to UMF_RESULT_ERROR_INVALID_CTL_PATH
test/pools/disjoint_pool_ctl.cpp Added comprehensive CTL tests for disjoint pool parameters and defaults
test/pools/disjoint_pool.cpp Added post-initialization CTL calls to existing tests
src/pool/pool_disjoint.c Implemented extensive CTL parameter support with read/write handlers
src/memory_provider.c Added provider CTL defaults system and post-initialization support
src/memory_pool.c Enhanced pool creation with CTL defaults and post-initialization
examples/ctl/ Added comprehensive CTL usage examples

Copy link
Contributor

@lukaszstolarczuk lukaszstolarczuk left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM, I mostly reviewed the docs.

1 issue left in my prev. comments - a typo.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants