> YAMAMOTO Takashi wrote:
> 
> > i'd suggest something like the following:
> > 
> > files.bsd44
> > 	defflag secmodel_bsd44 : secmodel_bsd44_logic
> > 	file secmodel/bsd44/secmodel_bsd44.c		secmodel_bsd44
> > 	file secmodel/bsd44/secmodel_bsd44_foo.c	secmodel_bsd44_logic
> > 	file secmodel/bsd44/secmodel_bsd44_bar.c	secmodel_bsd44_logic
> > 
> > files.overlay
> > 	defflag secmodel_overlay : secmodel_bsd44_logic
> > 	file secmodel/overlay/secmodel_overlay.c	secmodel_overlay
> > 
> > secmodel_bsd44.c only contains "bsd44" version of secmodel_start().
> > secmodel_overlay.c contains "overlay" version of secmodel_start().
> 
> At the moment, secmodel_bsd44.c contains not just the start routine, but
> also other elements (like the sysctl stuff, that are NOT needed when we
> use the overlay model, or the initialization stuff, that IS needed
> regardless).
> 
> So we will have to have a secmodel_bsd44_start.c with just the start
> routine, and leave secmodel_bsd44.c with the rest of the stuff, or
> something like that. No?

yes.

(my thought was moving the rest of secmodel_bsd44.c to secmodel_bsd44_foo.c,
but it's the same thing except filenames.  because the start routine and
its friends are the most "secmodel_bsd44-dedicated" part of the code,
i thought it's appropriate to name it secmodel_bsd44.c.)

YAMAMOTO Takashi