From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sun, 12 Nov 2000 18:29:47 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sun, 12 Nov 2000 18:29:37 -0500 Received: from panic.ohr.gatech.edu ([130.207.47.194]:10504 "EHLO havoc.gtf.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Sun, 12 Nov 2000 18:29:31 -0500 Message-ID: <3A0F27B6.3B4CF1AC@mandrakesoft.com> Date: Sun, 12 Nov 2000 18:28:54 -0500 From: Jeff Garzik Organization: MandrakeSoft X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.4.0-test11 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Neil Brown CC: Linus Torvalds , viro@math.psu.edu, Rasmus Andersen , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: PATCH 2.4.0.11.3: sysctl.h fixes In-Reply-To: <200011121430.JAA22978@havoc.gtf.org> <14863.8573.827836.127665@notabene.cse.unsw.edu.au> 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 Neil Brown wrote: > The declaration of: > > struct file; > > in sysctl.h is a bit counter intuitive isn't it? Nope. It's a useful technique that I was reminded of recently by DaveM. Have you ever looked at the -nasty- include nesting that occurs because key kernel headers include other key kernel headers all the time? Its way past time to reverse that trend. Using "struct foo;" at the beginning of the header simply passes on the task of including the definiton for 'struct foo' down the line, avoiding another level of include nesting. But... that said. Provided no other kernel code is similarly broken, your fix to md.c, Neil, is definitely superior to adding includes and 'struct file;' to sysctl.h. Jeff -- Jeff Garzik | Building 1024 | Would you like a Twinkie? MandrakeSoft | - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/