[lkml]   [2006]   [Apr]   [1]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [RFC][PATCH 1/2] Create initial kernel ABI header infrastructure

    > I plan to add a lot of other definitions to this file
    > later on. For example different architectures have
    > different notions of what a __kernel_ino_t is (unsigned
    > int versus unsigned long). I may rename this file as
    > types.h, but from looking through the code I figure I'll
    > have enough general purpose declarations about "This
    > architecture has blah" that a separate stddef.h file
    > will be worth it.
    > >(and... why do you prefix these with _KABI? that's a
    > >mistake imo. Don't bother with that. Really. Either
    > >these need exporting to userspace, but then either use
    > >__ as prefix or don't use a prefix. But KABI.. No.)
    > According to the various standards all symbols beginning
    > with __ are reserved for "The Implementation", including
    > the compiler, the standard library, the kernel, etc. In
    > order to avoid clashing with any/all of those, I picked
    > the __KABI_ and __kabi_ prefixes for uniqueness. In
    > theory I could just use __, but there are problems with
    > that too. For example, note how the current compiler.h
    > files redefine __always_inline to mean something kinda
    > different. The GCC manual says we should be able to
    > write this:

    __KABI_ everywhere will just make your headers totally unreadable.
    Please don't do that.

    Thanks, Sharp!
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2006-04-03 14:22    [W:0.034 / U:1.728 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site