netdev - Re: [PATCH] proc

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Sun, 28 Oct 2007 10:34:15 +0000
From:	Russell King <rmk+lkml@....linux.org.uk>
To:	Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
Cc:	Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>, akpm@...l.org,
	torvalds@...l.org, viro@...iv.linux.org.uk,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-arch@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] proc_fs.h redux

On Sat, Oct 27, 2007 at 03:40:04PM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> and forward declarations of
> 
> struct proc_dir_entry;
> struct file_operations;
> 
> As a general rule, I think it better to use includes
> than use naked forward declarations.

If you go down that route, you end up with _lots_ of circular
dependencies - header file X needs Y needs Z which needs X.  We've
been there, several times.  It very quickly becomes quite
unmaintainable - you end up with hard to predict behaviour from
include files.

The only realistic solution is to use forward declarations.

-- 
Russell King
 Linux kernel    2.6 ARM Linux   - http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/
 maintainer of:
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html