public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Chris Metcalf <cmetcalf@tilera.com>
To: Matthew Wilcox <matthew@wil.cx>
Cc: <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-arch@vger.kernel.org>,
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Break out types from <linux/list.h> to	<linux/list_types.h>.
Date: Fri, 2 Jul 2010 17:09:44 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4C2E5598.2090503@tilera.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100702204817.GB5842@parisc-linux.org>

On 7/2/2010 4:48 PM, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 02, 2010 at 03:33:52PM -0400, Chris Metcalf wrote:
>   
>> On 7/2/2010 3:19 PM, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
>>     
>>> Why a new header file instead of linux/types.h?
>>>       
>> I was working from analogy to kvm_types.h, mm_types.h, rwlock_types.h,
>> spinlock_types.h.  My impression is that linux/types.h is generally for
>> basic (non-struct) types, with atomic_t/atomic64_t being added as
>> "almost non-struct types", and of course the historical exception of
>> "struct ustat", which has been there since the dawn of time (0.97 anyway).
>>     
> I think list_head, hlist_head and hlist_node qualify as "almost non-struct
> types", don't you?  :-)
>   

I see the smiley, but to reply seriously, the distinction I was making
was that atomic_t is really just an integer type, but with typing magic
to protect it from implicit conversion -- unlike list_head, which really
is a more complex type.

I suppose one could make a kind of "intent of the founders"
constitutional law-type argument suggesting that the presence of "struct
ustat" suggests more complex types are in fact appropriate in
<linux/types.h>.  :-)

> I wouldn't mind seeing kvm_types.h, rwlock_types.h and spinlock_types.h
> merged into types.h, personally.  They're all pretty fundamental kernel
> kind of types.  It's a matter of taste, and I'm not particularly fussed
> one way or the other.
>   

Somehow it's hard to see kvm_ioapic_redirect_entry on a par with size_t :-)

> I just object to the unnecessary creation of tiny files like this.
> Which is how we ended up with atomic_t and atomic64_t in there in the
> first place :-)
>   

In any case, I think this either way is plausible, but in the absence of
more folks weighing in, I think "avoid adding a complex type to
<linux/types.h>" sounds more convincing to me than "avoid adding a new
tiny file", though I certainly do buy the latter argument.

-- 
Chris Metcalf, Tilera Corp.
http://www.tilera.com


  reply	other threads:[~2010-07-02 21:09 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-06-25 21:00 [PATCH] arch/tile: Add driver to enable access to the user dynamic network Chris Metcalf
2010-06-26 11:16 ` Arnd Bergmann
2010-06-27 17:00   ` Chris Metcalf
2010-06-28 11:12     ` Arnd Bergmann
2010-06-28 15:23       ` Chris Metcalf
2010-06-28 19:34         ` Arnd Bergmann
2010-07-02 12:19           ` Chris Metcalf
2010-07-02 16:11             ` Arnd Bergmann
2010-07-02 17:41               ` [PATCH] Break out types from <linux/list.h> to <linux/list_types.h> Chris Metcalf
2010-07-02 19:19                 ` Matthew Wilcox
2010-07-02 19:33                   ` Chris Metcalf
2010-07-02 20:48                     ` Matthew Wilcox
2010-07-02 21:09                       ` Chris Metcalf [this message]
2010-07-03  8:44                       ` Alexey Dobriyan
2010-07-03  9:00                       ` Arnd Bergmann
2010-07-04  1:47                         ` Chris Metcalf
2010-07-04  3:22                           ` Matthew Wilcox
2010-07-02 20:43                   ` Arnd Bergmann
2010-07-02 21:10                     ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-07-02 17:52               ` [PATCH] arch/tile: Add driver to enable access to the user dynamic network Chris Metcalf

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=4C2E5598.2090503@tilera.com \
    --to=cmetcalf@tilera.com \
    --cc=arnd@arndb.de \
    --cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=matthew@wil.cx \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox