linux-kernel - how many "KERNEL" macro variations do we really need?

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>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0612010757430.1721@localhost.localdomain>
Date:	Fri, 1 Dec 2006 08:00:11 -0500 (EST)
From:	"Robert P. J. Day" <rpjday@...dspring.com>
To:	Linux kernel mailing list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: how many "KERNEL" macro variations do we really need?

  i'm sure there's a simpler way to write this:

include/linux/soundcard.h:
  #if (!defined(__KERNEL__) && !defined(KERNEL) && !defined(INKERNEL)  && !defined(_KERNEL)) ||
defined(USE_SEQ_MACROS)

__KERNEL__ versus KERNEL versus INKERNEL versus _KERNEL?  surely,
those can't *all* be necessary.  or can they?

rday

-
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/