From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from astoria.ccjclearline.com ([64.235.106.9]:41593 "EHLO astoria.ccjclearline.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756273AbYEUIgf (ORCPT ); Wed, 21 May 2008 04:36:35 -0400 Date: Wed, 21 May 2008 04:36:30 -0400 (EDT) From: "Robert P. J. Day" Subject: Re: [PATCH] KBUILD: Move non-__KERNEL__-checking headers to header-y. In-Reply-To: <20080520000835.80f7b14a.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Message-ID: References: <20080520000835.80f7b14a.akpm@linux-foundation.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kbuild-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Andrew Morton Cc: kbuild devel list On Tue, 20 May 2008, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Sat, 17 May 2008 20:18:07 -0400 (EDT) "Robert P. J. Day" wrote: > > > > > Move exported header files under include/linux that don't check the > > __KERNEL__ preprocessor from unifdef-y to header-y. > > > > Changelog fails to tell us why this change is being made. > > Perhaps it's because these headers just don't need unifdef processing? > > If so, that seems fragile. If we later add a __KERNEL__ section to > a header we need to remember to move the file to unifdef-y, and > we'll forget. It'd be better to process all files with unifdef. > > Or something. Or not. i don't see a problem with simply running all exported files through unifdef -- i've never understood the two categories since the unifdef process is not exactly CPU-intensive and it can't possibly hurt for some of those operations to be redundant. but as long as the two categories exist, might as well keep them clean. rday -- ======================================================================== Robert P. J. Day Linux Consulting, Training and Annoying Kernel Pedantry: Have classroom, will lecture. http://crashcourse.ca Waterloo, Ontario, CANADA ========================================================================