From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751257AbWCBOYS (ORCPT ); Thu, 2 Mar 2006 09:24:18 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751380AbWCBOYS (ORCPT ); Thu, 2 Mar 2006 09:24:18 -0500 Received: from omx2-ext.sgi.com ([192.48.171.19]:15265 "EHLO omx2.sgi.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751257AbWCBOYS (ORCPT ); Thu, 2 Mar 2006 09:24:18 -0500 Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2006 06:23:59 -0800 From: Paul Jackson To: Christoph Hellwig Cc: akpm@osdl.org, Simon.Derr@bull.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, ebiederm@xmission.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] Proc: move proc fs hooks from cpuset.c to proc/fs/base.c Message-Id: <20060302062359.5940ff7f.pj@sgi.com> In-Reply-To: <20060302084739.GC21902@infradead.org> References: <20060302070812.15674.50176.sendpatchset@jackhammer.engr.sgi.com> <20060302084739.GC21902@infradead.org> Organization: SGI X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 2.1.7 (GTK+ 2.4.9; i686-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > Seems pointless. This just increases #ifdef churn for no gain. Take a look at fs/proc/base.c. That's how pretty much all the other proc hooks are done, with ifdef's around their proc hooks. ifdef minimization is a good goal, yes. But uniformity of practice is another good goal. -- I won't rest till it's the best ... Programmer, Linux Scalability Paul Jackson 1.925.600.0401