Re: More effective processing (Re: [PATCH 25/33] kbuild: use POSIX BRE in headers install target)

Oleg Verych
2007-07-21T22:25:56Z

On Sun, Jul 22, 2007 at 12:13:26AM +0200, Sam Ravnborg wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 22, 2007 at 12:16:27AM +0200, Oleg Verych wrote:
> >
> > What do you think about this one? I want to propose to remove
> > scripts/unifdef.c but to make clear policy about how to mark __KERNEL__
> > sections in header files. We know how obfuscated C can be, and this also
> > applies to preprocessing. There's known CodingStyle about some points.
> > The thing is to specify rules, that will be easy for `sed` to do cleaup
> > job.
> >
> > ./linux/soundcard.h:#if (!defined(__KERNEL__) && !defined(KERNEL) && !defined(INKERNEL)
> > && !defined(_KERNEL)) || defined(USE_SEQ_MACROS)
> > ./linux/stat.h:#if defined(__KERNEL__) || !defined(__GLIBC__) || (__GLIBC__ < 2)
> >
> > Split __KERNEL__ check, make only positive, i.e.
> >
> > #if defined(__KERNEL__)
> > #ifdef __KERNEL__
> >
> > ./linux/stat.h:#ifdef __KERNEL__
> >
> > No `#else` and ending part to contain comment:
> >
> > ./linux/smb_fs_sb.h:#endif /* __KERNEL__ */
> >
> > Simple enough:
> >
> > sed '/^#if[^_]*__KERNEL__/,/^#end[^_]*__KERNEL__/d'
>
> What are you trying to say with the above?
> Sorry but I lost track of part of the discussion but you seems to havea point here?

I want to suggest more easy and tools-friendly way of processing header
files in the headrer_install target. One line above, one paragraph in
CodingStyle, one tree revision from KJ group.
____