tech-kern archive

[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.

What are the issues here that we need to fix this right now?

Can you please post changes and/or start a thread about all this
before you do them on tech-kern?


Home | Main Index | Thread Index | Old Index