From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Bernhard Walle <bwalle@suse.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] proc_fs.h redux
Date: Sun, 28 Oct 2007 12:59:52 +0100
Message-ID: <20071028115952.GA18479@suse.de>
References: <20071027194758.GD9816@martell.zuzino.mipt.ru> <1193524804.26695.103.camel@localhost> <20071028103415.GA12554@flint.arm.linux.org.uk>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Cc: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>,
	Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@gmail.com>, akpm@osdl.org,
	torvalds@osdl.org
To: viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org
Return-path: <netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from cantor.suse.de ([195.135.220.2]:49757 "EHLO mx1.suse.de"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1751121AbXJ1L7z (ORCPT <rfc822;netdev@vger.kernel.org>);
	Sun, 28 Oct 2007 07:59:55 -0400
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20071028103415.GA12554@flint.arm.linux.org.uk>
Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org

* Russell King <rmk+lkml@arm.linux.org.uk> [2007-10-28 11:34]:
> 
> 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.

In header files, yes. But that's not true for implementation files.


Thanks,
   Bernhard