Re: CVS commit: src/sys

[Antti Kantee <pooka%cs.hut.fi@localhost>]

On Tue Apr 13 2010 at 13:26:55 -0700, Jason Thorpe wrote:
> 
> On Apr 12, 2010, at 3:15 PM, Antti Kantee wrote:
> 
> > Module Name:        src
> > Committed By:       pooka
> > Date:               Mon Apr 12 22:15:32 UTC 2010
> > 
> > Modified Files:
> >     src/sys/conf: files
> >     src/sys/kern: kern_lwp.c
> >     src/sys/sys: lwp.h
> > Added Files:
> >     src/sys/kern: subr_lwp_specificdata.c
> > 
> > Log Message:
> > Separate lwp specificdata data structure management from lwp cpu/vm
> > management.
> > 
> > No functional change.
> > 
> > (specificdata routines went from kern_lwp.c to subr_lwp_specificdata.c)
> 
> I find this sort of re-factoring somewhat irritating.  Can't you just #ifndef 
> _RUMP_BUILD or some such so that we don't have to constantly split related 
> functions into separate files?

I also find it irritating and wish they had been done right from the
start.  But this, of course, is a completely absurd wish, since nobody
can be expected to reliably predict what will happen in the future.

As the commit message clearly indicates, the routines are not related
all axes considered.  I'm sure when people realized things like MI and MD
code weren't related and had to split, there was similar irritation, but
aren't we now glad ifdefs were *not* used.

Now, I could just bulldoze through the kernel and organize it how I
think it should be organized and because of too much intrusiveness not
commit that or any dependant work, or, for the other extreme, lay in
ifdef after ifdef and end up with complete spaghetti.  However, I find
the approach of the multidimensional minmax for developer irritation,
working code and final resulting mess the most practical approach to
attempting something new.