Subject: Re: multiple inclusion protection for kernel files
To: Simon Burge <>
From: Matt Thomas <>
List: tech-kern
Date: 12/04/2005 09:28:33
Simon Burge wrote:

> In some cases I think it's better to leave as _MACHINE_FOO_H_.  Let's
> pick the 68k ports <machine/elf_machdep.h> as an example, which looks
> like:
> 	#include <m68k/elf_machdep.h>
> 	#endif
> If you're doing a diff of two different m68k ports, I think it's a win
> to have these two show up the same.  I haven't thought too much if it's
> always better to use _MACHINE_FOO_H_ or not though...

That is one of few cases where multiple inclusion protection isn't needed.

I'd prefer to see just a naked #include

Matt Thomas                     email:
3am Software Foundry              www:
Cupertino, CA              disclaimer: I avow all knowledge of this message.