[lkml]   [2002]   [Sep]   [1]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: page-flags.h pollution?
On Friday 30 August 2002 08:37, Andrew Morton wrote:
> David Mosberger wrote:
> >
> > In the 2.5.3x kernel, what's the point of defining pte_chain_lock()
> > and pte_chain_unlock() in page-flags.h? These two routines make it
> > impossible to include page-flags.h on it's own, because they require
> > "struct page" to be defined (and a forward declaration isn't
> > sufficient either). This can introduce rather annoying circular
> > include-file dependencies.
> It's a wart. The now-abandoned hashed spinlocking patch moves
> them into <linux/rmap-locking.h>. We can do that anyway - only
> two files need it.
> Or maybe just put them in asm-generic/rmap.h. I'll fix it up.

Yup. As a matter of principle, headers for data should be separated from
headers for operations.

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: 2005-03-22 13:28    [W:0.057 / U:0.212 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site