Messages in this thread |  | | | From | (Eric W. Biederman) | | Date | Sat, 13 Jun 2009 13:53:30 -0700 | | Subject | Re: 2.6.31 -mm merge plans |
| |
Amerigo Wang <amwang@redhat.com> writes:
> Al Viro wrote: >> On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 09:15:05AM +0800, Amerigo Wang wrote: >> >>> Hi, Al. >>> >>> Just as what I said in the description of that patch, one only has extern >>> functions that are _only_ used in another as function pointers. >>> >> >> Er... So what? Amount of functions made static is not, per se, a >> useful metrics of anything. >> > Not only about static, but also because they are used via function pointers. > > Logically, it is better for these functions used via pointers to be kept in > the same file with the struct which holds these function pointers.
I am going to agree with Al here. array.c has a well defined function and purpose. base.c is on it's way to becoming a dumping ground. The only reason the functions in array.c are used directly in base.c is that we don't have a way to dynamically register struct pid_entry's.
Given the number of ifdefs in base.c it looks like it could really benefit from splitting up. I made it about half way there last time I was working on proc.
Eric
|  |