Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 12 Apr 2006 15:28:36 -0700 | From | Greg KH <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] Fix pciehp driver on non ACPI systems |
| |
On Thu, Apr 06, 2006 at 08:14:22PM +0200, Sam Ravnborg wrote: > On Thu, Apr 06, 2006 at 10:57:04AM -0700, Greg KH wrote: > > > > > > #include "../pci.h" > > > > > > When one introdues relative apths like the above this is a good sign > > > that the header file ought to move to a common place somewhere in > > > include/. > > > > No, this is a pci-core only header file. I really don't want to have > > these in include/linux/pci.h as no one other than the pci core, or pci > > hotplug drivers need to use it. > > But that hold true for other stuff in include/* also. > > The guideline is (my understanding): > - Use .h files only when declarations are shared by more than one .c > file > - Put the .h file in same dir as the .c files, iff the .c files are all > in same dir (and include using #include "file.h") > - For bigger subsystems create an include/<subsystem> dir for shared .h > files (and include using #include <file.h>) > - For smaller subsystems create an include/linux/<subsystem> dir for > shared .h files (and include using #include <file.h>) > > And then we also have: > - For Greg's pci-core keep the shared .h file with the .c files > (and include using #include "../file.h")
Ok, sometimes I feel special, but never that "special" :) If you note, USB also does this for its core files, so there is precidence...
Anyway, is include/linux/pci/pci.h really necessary for just one file? I guess I could put the msi stuff in there, but again, I really don't want any driver including it, like they have tried to do so in the past...
thanks,
greg k-h - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |