Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 23 Apr 2001 08:04:05 +0200
From:      Mark Murray <mark@grondar.za>
To:        Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au>
Cc:        smp@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: Kernel include file cleanup take #3. 
Message-ID:  <200104230602.f3N62Tw49163@gratis.grondar.za>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0104231421360.3027-100000@besplex.bde.org> ; from Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au>  "Mon, 23 Apr 2001 15:07:07 %2B1000."
References:  <Pine.BSF.4.21.0104231421360.3027-100000@besplex.bde.org> 

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > http://people.freebsd.org/~markm/patches/sys.SYS_MUTEX.diff.1
> 
> I'm almost (:-) happy with this version.  The includes of <sys/mutex.h>
> in <sys/buf.h> and <net/if_var.h> are too hard to move without moving
> the inline functions.

Right.

> <sys/lockmgr.h> was already a subinclude of <sys/lock.h>, and
> _SYS_LOCKMGR_H_ is still misspelled (was missing SYS_ and MGR, now
> missing SYS_ ...).

D'uh. Ok fixed.

>                     You actually made <sys/lockmgr.h> a subinclude of
> other headers that need it, and one that doesn't (<sys/conf.h> doesn't
> need it directly, but it includes <sys/eventhandler.h> which does).

OK. Removed it (plus some other junk) from eventhandler.

> <sys/lock.h> doesn't need it any more (but *.c might depend on it
> being there).  Some of the includes of it are commented on too
> verbosely.

Empirically, a lot of .c's need it now. (particularly now that I've
knocked sys/lockmgr.h out of them).

> Some of the new includes seem to be a bit more disordered than necessary.
> When inserting in unsorted include lists, I normally insert just before
> the first order reversal (not counting param.h or systm.h).

Noted. I'll fix that. There may be other ordering issues. This one will
take a bit of time.

> Please change the copyright owner to yourself.  FreeBSD, Inc. still
> doesn't exist in a form suitable for holding copyrights.

OK. Done. For such small files I'd prefer them to be owned by the project,
but I don't care enough to be religious about it.

> I'm not sure if the names for the new types headers are right.  Perhaps
> they should have a leading underscore to inhibit direct inclusion, or
> not have the "_types" suffix, to make them less verbose and not hint
> that they are limited to types.

How about _mutex.h and _lock.h?

M
-- 
Mark Murray
Warning: this .sig is umop ap!sdn

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200104230602.f3N62Tw49163>