From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Russell King Subject: Re: [PATCH] proc_fs.h redux Date: Sun, 28 Oct 2007 10:34:15 +0000 Message-ID: <20071028103415.GA12554@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> References: <20071027194758.GD9816@martell.zuzino.mipt.ru> <1193524804.26695.103.camel@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Alexey Dobriyan , akpm@osdl.org, torvalds@osdl.org, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org To: Joe Perches Return-path: Received: from caramon.arm.linux.org.uk ([78.32.30.218]:44252 "EHLO caramon.arm.linux.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751443AbXJ1Kjx (ORCPT ); Sun, 28 Oct 2007 06:39:53 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1193524804.26695.103.camel@localhost> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On Sat, Oct 27, 2007 at 03:40:04PM -0700, Joe Perches wrote: > and forward declarations of > > struct proc_dir_entry; > struct file_operations; > > As a general rule, I think it better to use includes > than use naked forward declarations. If you go down that route, you end up with _lots_ of circular dependencies - header file X needs Y needs Z which needs X. We've been there, several times. It very quickly becomes quite unmaintainable - you end up with hard to predict behaviour from include files. The only realistic solution is to use forward declarations. -- Russell King Linux kernel 2.6 ARM Linux - http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/ maintainer of: