From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([18.85.46.34]:33949 "EHLO bombadil.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752997AbYFDNwN (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 Jun 2008 09:52:13 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH] wireless.h: improve userland include-ability From: David Woodhouse To: David Miller Cc: linville@tuxdriver.com, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, kirill@shutemov.name In-Reply-To: <20080603.120515.193703574.davem@davemloft.net> References: <1212515497-21578-1-git-send-email-linville@tuxdriver.com> <20080603.120515.193703574.davem@davemloft.net> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Wed, 04 Jun 2008 14:52:09 +0100 Message-Id: <1212587529.32207.82.camel@pmac.infradead.org> (sfid-20080604_155219_719826_F1767E86) Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Tue, 2008-06-03 at 12:05 -0700, David Miller wrote: > Yeah, go check so me magic userspace tool header to see what magic is > needed just to include a core networking header file correctly. > > No, thanks. Just to clarify: this is only a problem for userspace, and you're objecting to that? Just including within the kernel will continue to work. We've traditionally got away with saying 'caveat emptor' when userspace includes kernel headers -- you _have_ to include the right prerequisites, because the kernel doesn't do it for you. I'm happy enough to change that, but it means seeing stuff like... #ifndef __KERNEL__ #include #endif ... in kernel headers. Is that what you're intending, or am I misunderstanding your objection? I believe that the main reason for this patch was that and both have problems when you include them in the same C file as the 'proper' glibc equivalent? Is that something we can address, instead of just dropping those includes? -- dwmw2