Re: [PATCH] perf: Move fs.* to generic lib/lk/

[Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@infradead.org>]

Em Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 02:50:34PM +0100, Borislav Petkov escreveu:
> On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 01:27:01PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > I don't think those other bits should go into this library. rbtree
> > should go into lib/rbtree/, command-line bits into lib/cmdline/, build
> > system helpers into lib/build/, etc.
> >
> > Merging unrelated things into a single library is a user-space disease
> > we need not repeat.
> 
> Well, rbtree is basically rblist.c and the rbtree*.h headers which
> simply wrap the kernel headers.
> 
> cmdline is parse-options.c.
> 
> IOW, that's splitting it into too granulary pieces with 1-2 compilation
> units ber library.

Lets do one at a time, so far we agreed that the ones that involves
parsing procfs/sysfs etc should go in tools/lib/(fs)?kapi, so lets do
that one.
 
> And what if there are interdependencies between the stuff split this
> way? That could become very painful and unnecessary.
 
> So having a simple single library which includes generic stuff needed to
> interface with the kernel is much simpler and sane, IMHO.
 
> And, since we're keeping it internal, we can do the split the other way
> around instead - first do the single generic library and then carve out
> a certain subset of functionality if/when it makes sense.
 
> The same approach we can use for the name - first split and work with it
> and change stuff when the need for it arises.
 
> > I'd also not expose any of this externally but straight link it into
> > the individual utilities - that way it does not matter that it's a
> > nice, topical, fine-grained set of functionality.
> >
> > I don't think we are ready for (nor do we want the overhead of)
> > maintaining a library ABI at this stage.
> >
> > Once things slow down and it's all so robust that we've had at most
> > a handful of commits in tools/lib/ in a full year we can think about
> > exporting it, maybe ...
> 
> Right.

yeah.