On Sep 10, 2005, at 04:45:43, Andrew Morton wrote:
This patch seems to have a rather low value-to-noise ratio. Why
on earth do we want to do this?
When I started trying to split out the userspace<=>kernelspace ABI
headers, I
found a number of things (such as __ASSEMBLY__) that would not operate
properly in userspace. I did a bit of research and noticed that GCC
had a
macro __ASSEMBLER__ defined everywhere we wanted __ASSEMBLY__ to be
defined,
except probably more reliably (IE: We don't need to manually pass
flags to
gas). I figured that if I was going to change the linux-core headers, I
might as well change the rest. If you don't think this is
appropriate, I
would be interested to hear your opinion, although it might have
saved me a
bunch of work if you had brought up your issues before I split the thing
into chunks. :-D
Cheers,
Kyle Moffett
--
There are two ways of constructing a software design. One way is to
make it so
simple that there are obviously no deficiencies. And the other way is
to make
it so complicated that there are no obvious deficiencies. The first
method is
far more difficult.
-- C.A.R. Hoare
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
| |
 |