[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAMuHMdVSvPk8wYZKVKX_xW_VSHu2qMoX-N4ePRJHejw2nh9JKg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2023 09:26:23 +0100
From: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
To: Finn Thain <fthain@...ux-m68k.org>
Cc: Andreas Schwab <schwab@...ux-m68k.org>,
linux-m68k@...ts.linux-m68k.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] nubus: Don't list card resources by default
Hi Finn,
On Fri, Mar 24, 2023 at 1:05 AM Finn Thain <fthain@...ux-m68k.org> wrote:
> On Thu, 23 Mar 2023, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 23, 2023 at 9:39 AM Andreas Schwab <schwab@...ux-m68k.org> wrote:
> > > On Mär 23 2023, Finn Thain wrote:
> > > > Checkpatch says "externs should be avoided in .c files" and if this one
> > > > appeared twice I would agree. But as it only appears once, I can't see
> > > > any advantage to putting it in a new .h file instead of the .c file...
> > >
> > > Anything wrong with declaring it in <linux/nubus.h>?
> >
> > It's not meant for NuBus device drivers (at least in its current form).
> > So a drivers/nubus/nubus.h would be the most logical place.
>
> I think Andreas is right inasmuchas the existing prototypes shared between
> drivers/nubus/nubus.c and drivers/nubus/proc.c are found there, and this
> extern is another one of those.
>
> But I take Geert's point that much of include/linux/nubus.h could be moved
> to drivers/nubus/something.h. But is there anything to be gained from
> splitting it up that way?
Splitting it would prevent NuBus device drivers from messing with
internal NuBus variables they're not intended to access.
But I agree that's not a big concern...
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@...ux-m68k.org
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds
Powered by blists - more mailing lists