lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2010]   [Mar]   [21]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: should new kfifo implementation really be exporting that much?
    On Sun, Mar 14, 2010 at 12:49:08PM -0400, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
    > On Sun, 14 Mar 2010, Tilman Schmidt wrote:
    >
    > > Am 14.03.2010 15:57 schrieb Robert P. J. Day:
    > > > as a short followup, kfifo.h strongly implies that a lot of the
    > > > above shouldn't be exported:
    > > >
    > > > ...
    > > > /*
    > > > * __kfifo_in_... internal functions for put date into the fifo
    > > > * do not call it directly, use kfifo_in_rec() instead
    > > > */
    > > > ...
    > > >
    > > > anyway, you get the idea. it would seem that a lot of those EXPORTs
    > > > should be removed, no?
    > >
    > > If you look at kfifo_in_rec(), it's a static inline void function
    > > defined in kfifo.h and which calls __kfifo_in_generic() or
    > > __kfifo_in_rec(). I don't think you'll be able to make that work
    > > without exporting those functions.
    >
    > huh. i believe you're correct. i'll take a closer look but i still
    > get this feeling that there's something ... messy about that API.
    > case in point: kfifo_in_rec() is *not* being exported, but a routine
    > that it invokes -- __kfifo_in_generic() -- *is* being exported.
    > doesn't that just seem a bit backwards?

    I believe it would be a good idea to have an export type explicitly
    covering symbols that are exported solely for the use of inlines,
    just for tidying up these situations. EXPORT_SYMBOL_INTERNAL?

    Jon.


    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2010-03-21 11:01    [W:0.023 / U:59.852 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site