From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Jul 12 02:18:30 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A74EB82D for ; Sat, 12 Jul 2014 02:18:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: from eastrmfepo203.cox.net (eastrmfepo203.cox.net [68.230.241.218]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 49B8220B2 for ; Sat, 12 Jul 2014 02:18:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: from eastrmimpo210 ([68.230.241.225]) by eastrmfepo203.cox.net (InterMail vM.8.01.05.15 201-2260-151-145-20131218) with ESMTP id <20140712021822.QJO2658.eastrmfepo203.cox.net@eastrmimpo210> for ; Fri, 11 Jul 2014 22:18:22 -0400 Received: from [192.168.3.22] ([72.219.202.186]) by eastrmimpo210 with cox id REJN1o00341obj401EJNnG; Fri, 11 Jul 2014 22:18:22 -0400 X-CT-Class: Clean X-CT-Score: 0.00 X-CT-RefID: str=0001.0A020205.53C09AEE.007D,ss=1,re=0.000,fgs=0 X-CT-Spam: 0 X-Authority-Analysis: v=2.0 cv=aZC/a2Ut c=1 sm=1 a=k40gPPfQ5QH6qv5U/EJc3Q==:17 a=f5xKl4ys9bwA:10 a=XigzRtDixlUA:10 a=G8Uczd0VNMoA:10 a=Wajolswj7cQA:10 a=8nJEP1OIZ-IA:10 a=kviXuzpPAAAA:8 a=kIqromvITh2ow2PlRWgA:9 a=wPNLvfGTeEIA:10 a=k40gPPfQ5QH6qv5U/EJc3Q==:117 X-CM-Score: 0.00 Authentication-Results: cox.net; none Message-ID: <53C09B48.8000709@cox.net> Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2014 22:19:52 -0400 From: "John D. Hendrickson and Sara Darnell" Reply-To: johnandsara2@cox.net User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.24 (X11/20100228) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: John Baldwin Subject: Re: How to properly handle several fonctions provided by the Winbond SuperIO chip? References: <1118241087.138096.1403180509132.JavaMail.zimbra@arkoon-netasq.com> <53BF23A0.1000603@cox.net> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Emeric POUPON , freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 12 Jul 2014 02:18:30 -0000 John Baldwin wrote: > On Thursday, July 10, 2014 7:37:04 pm John D. Hendrickson and Sara Darnell > wrote: >> John Baldwin wrote: >>> On Thursday, June 19, 2014 11:21:59 am Emeric POUPON wrote: >>>> Thanks for your answer! > > No, the question is if you have two C files that are compiled into a single > loading object (foo.ko), do they call each other's functions directly or do > they use an indirection layer like kobj to call into each other. thx. i shouldn't answer (i asked) i just read linux kernel at times. i just assume the "two files" are both for the same kernel module and it would be ok. in which case using two C files isn't necessary ... but might confuse the Makefiles macros if they guess one C per mod try put both in one C file and spin the wheel why not try ? two diff mods call each other, in one .o or not, diff story i think