linux-kernel - Re: [RFT] sched.h removal from module.h

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Message-ID: <20060829113159.GB23975@infradead.org>
Date:	Tue, 29 Aug 2006 12:31:59 +0100
From:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To:	Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@...oo.com.au>
Cc:	Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFT] sched.h removal from module.h

On Tue, Aug 29, 2006 at 11:10:27AM +1000, Nick Piggin wrote:
> >This is done by duplicating prototype of wake_up_process() which seems
> >to be the only thing module.h wants.
> 
> This is really ugly, IMO. It makes the code less maintainable, so I don't
> think there is any point in doing it. In this case, we really do want to
> use scheduler functions, so the thing you do in that case is to include
> sched.h, not declare them yourself :(
> 
> If you are particularly concerned about this, just move all those refcount
> inlines into kernel/module.c (they're too big anyway)... then you can drop
> the sched.h include from module.h for free ;)

Agreed.  At least module_put should move out of line.
-
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/