[PATCH] romfs: cleanup romfs_fs.h

[PATCH] romfs: cleanup romfs_fs.h

[Christoph Hellwig]

There's no kernel-only content in it anymore, so move it to header-y
and remove the superflous #ifdef __KERNEL__.


Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>

Index: linux-2.6/include/linux/Kbuild
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.orig/include/linux/Kbuild	2009-04-07 17:56:08.209569787 +0200
+++ linux-2.6/include/linux/Kbuild	2009-04-07 17:56:21.404447763 +0200
@@ -138,6 +138,7 @@ header-y += qnxtypes.h
 header-y += radeonfb.h
 header-y += raw.h
 header-y += resource.h
+header-y += romfs_fs.h
 header-y += rose.h
 header-y += serial_reg.h
 header-y += smbno.h
@@ -314,7 +315,6 @@ unifdef-y += irqnr.h
 unifdef-y += reboot.h
 unifdef-y += reiserfs_fs.h
 unifdef-y += reiserfs_xattr.h
-unifdef-y += romfs_fs.h
 unifdef-y += route.h
 unifdef-y += rtc.h
 unifdef-y += rtnetlink.h
Index: linux-2.6/include/linux/romfs_fs.h
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.orig/include/linux/romfs_fs.h	2009-04-07 17:55:56.004444938 +0200
+++ linux-2.6/include/linux/romfs_fs.h	2009-04-07 17:56:01.366447535 +0200
@@ -53,9 +53,4 @@ struct romfs_inode {
 #define ROMFH_PAD (ROMFH_SIZE-1)
 #define ROMFH_MASK (~ROMFH_PAD)
 
-#ifdef __KERNEL__
-
-/* Not much now */
-
-#endif /* __KERNEL__ */
 #endif

Re: [PATCH] romfs: cleanup romfs_fs.h

[Sam Ravnborg]

On Tue, Apr 07, 2009 at 06:07:08PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> There's no kernel-only content in it anymore, so move it to header-y
> and remove the superflous #ifdef __KERNEL__.

today there is no difference between header-y and unifdef-y.
We pass everything through unifdef these days.

	Sam

Re: [PATCH] romfs: cleanup romfs_fs.h

[Christoph Hellwig]

On Tue, Apr 07, 2009 at 07:44:57PM +0200, Sam Ravnborg wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 07, 2009 at 06:07:08PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > There's no kernel-only content in it anymore, so move it to header-y
> > and remove the superflous #ifdef __KERNEL__.
> 
> today there is no difference between header-y and unifdef-y.
> We pass everything through unifdef these days.

The __KERNEL__ removal still applies, and as long as we have two
different variables it should use the correct one.

But why do you send all through unifdef anyway?  That's a pretty bad
signal to send when we try to get people to do cleanly seprated headers.

Re: [PATCH] romfs: cleanup romfs_fs.h

[Sam Ravnborg]

On Tue, Apr 07, 2009 at 07:44:17PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 07, 2009 at 07:44:57PM +0200, Sam Ravnborg wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 07, 2009 at 06:07:08PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > > There's no kernel-only content in it anymore, so move it to header-y
> > > and remove the superflous #ifdef __KERNEL__.
> > 
> > today there is no difference between header-y and unifdef-y.
> > We pass everything through unifdef these days.
> 
> The __KERNEL__ removal still applies, and as long as we have two
> different variables it should use the correct one.
> 
> But why do you send all through unifdef anyway?  That's a pretty bad
> signal to send when we try to get people to do cleanly seprated headers.

We saw too many cases where headers was not assigned to unifdef-y
after introducing "#ifdef __KERNEL__".
So we integrated the install and unifdef step to avoid this.
And with the header stuff in kbuild redesigned the cost was acceptable to do so.

When I get some spare time I plan to re-implement the unifdef tool
so it does exactly what we want it to do so we can skip the
perl/unifdef stuff we have today.

And I should sent a patch to Linus to get rid of unifdef-y so not to
confuse people.

	Sam