[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]
Re: CVS commit: src/sys/arch/powerpc/oea
On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 11:24:21AM +0900, Masao Uebayashi wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 14, 2010 at 05:52:51AM +0000, David Holland wrote:
> > On Sun, Nov 14, 2010 at 03:32:44AM +0000, Masao Uebayashi wrote:
> > > XXX What is the conclusion about direct vs. indirect #include from
> > headers?
> > Every header file should include the things it requires to compile.
> > Therefore, there should in principle be no cases where a header file
> > (or source file) needs to #include something it doesn't itself use.
> This clarifies my long-unanswered question, thanks!
> I've (re)built about 300 kernels in the last days. I've found:
> - sys/sysctl.h's struct kinfo_proc should be moved into sys/proc.h
> (I've done this locally). Otherwise all sysctl node providers
> includes sys/proc.h and uvm/uvm_extern.h.
> (This is where I started...)
> - sys/syscallargs.h should be split into pieces, otherwise all its
> users have to know unrelated types (sys/mount.h, sys/cpu.h).
> - sys/proc.h's tsleep(), wakeup(), and friends should be moved into
> some common header, because it's widely used API. sys/proc.h will
> be used only for "struct proc" related things.
- We should provide sysconf() for kernel modules (device drivers) too,
otherwise we have to expose unnecessary symbols (uvmexp).
Main Index |
Thread Index |