| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 21 May 2008 18:23:35 -0700 (PDT) From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> To: torvalds@...ux-foundation.org Cc: viro@...IV.linux.org.uk, paulus@...ba.org, tiwai@...e.de, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: Moving include/asm-* From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> Date: Wed, 21 May 2008 18:20:27 -0700 (PDT) > On Thu, 22 May 2008, Al Viro wrote: > > > > Eh? git mv include/asm-$i arch/$i/include/asm, then? > > Yeah, sorry, I dropped an "include/" there. > > > Nice, but... how do you pull what's currently asm-generic/foo.h from what's > > currently asm-bar/foo.h? #include_next is _ugly_... > > I was actually going to suggest #include_next, yes. But if people hate it, > we can certainly just keep the current <asm-generic/xyz.h> approach. This discussion reminds me of one of my (numerous) pet peeves about the glibc source tree. If you want to figure out where something is implemented for a given target, you have to walk through the tree like a monkey in some prioritized list of directories to find the source file or header file that glibc ends up using. At least with what we're using now, you open up the file for ARCH and you see the includes so you know exactly where to go. So I think this "just provide no file to use default implementation" might not be the best idea in the long term. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists