On Sun, 23 Sep 2007, Dave Jones wrote:taking a step back, regardless of what constitutes a sane versus not-sane definition of a useful macro, i think a lot of the content of kernel.h could be moved out of there and put in a more appropriate header file called, say, macros.h. the first comment in kernel.h claims that /* * 'kernel.h' contains some often-used function prototypes etc */ but there's buckets more stuff in there than just some function prototypes. macros for type limits, alignment, array sizes, rounding, and on and on. and as for those prototypes, is there any reason that kernel.h includes them explicitly for the contents of lib/vsprintf.c rather than just including, say, a hypothetical vsprintf.h? just curious. in any case, it would seem that kernel.h could stand a good cleaning. it give the impression of just being an arbitrary dumping ground when folks can't figure out where to put something. rday -- ======================================================================== Robert P. J. Day Linux Consulting, Training and Annoying Kernel Pedantry Waterloo, Ontario, CANADA http://crashcourse.ca ======================================================================== -
| Mike Galbraith | Re: regression: CD burning (k3b) went broke |
| Andi Kleen | [PATCH] [3/22] x86_64: Kill temp boot pmds |
| Alan Cox | Re: [PATCH][RFC] 4K stacks default, not a debug thing any more...? |
| Greg Kroah-Hartman | [PATCH 004/196] Chinese: add translation of SubmittingPatches |
git: | |
| David Miller | [GIT]: Networking |
| Jarek Poplawski | [PATCH] pkt_sched: Destroy gen estimators under rtnl_lock(). |
| Gerrit Renker | [PATCH 05/37] dccp: Cleanup routines for feature negotiation |
| Brandeburg, Jesse | RE: [PATCH] e1000e: test MSI interrupts |
