Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: share COMPATIBLE_IOCTL()s across architectures | From | Andi Kleen <> | Date | 20 Mar 2003 21:26:49 +0100 |
| |
On Thu, 2003-03-20 at 20:33, Pavel Machek wrote: > Hi! > > > > --- linux-test/include/linux/compat_ioctl.h 2003-03-20 00:08:12.000000000 +0100 > > > +++ linux/include/linux/compat_ioctl.h 2003-03-19 23:36:24.000000000 +0100 > > > @@ -0,0 +1,641 @@ > > > +/* List here explicitly which ioctl's are known to have > > > + * compatible types passed or none at all... > > > + */ > > > +/* Big T */ > > > +COMPATIBLE_IOCTL(TCGETA) > > > > Shouldn't you put the include files needed for all that in there > > too? > > List of includes is *way* shorter than 600 lines of > COMPATIBLE_IOCTL. I prefer to keep it simple for now.
I disagree. The big issue with the duplicated code is not how long it is, but that it needs N changesets to fix something instead of one. Typically a new ioctl also adds a new include. If you keep the includes separated it'll have even more mainteance overhead than before (you need N+1 commits to add the new ioctl)
-Andi
- 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/
| |