linux-kernel - 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]

Message-ID: <20071028130429.GC12554@flint.arm.linux.org.uk>
Date:	Sun, 28 Oct 2007 13:04:29 +0000
From:	Russell King <rmk+lkml@....linux.org.uk>
To:	viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
	Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>,
	Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>, akpm@...l.org,
	torvalds@...l.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] proc_fs.h redux

On Sun, Oct 28, 2007 at 12:59:52PM +0100, Bernhard Walle wrote:
> * Russell King <rmk+lkml@....linux.org.uk> [2007-10-28 11:34]:
> > 
> > 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.
> 
> In header files, yes. But that's not true for implementation files.

I don't think that needs saying - it's quite obvious.  You can't
access the contents of structures without their definitions being
available.

-- 
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 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/