Messages in this thread | ![/](/images/icornerl.gif) | | Date | Fri, 21 Mar 2003 11:24:53 +0100 | From | Pavel Machek <> | Subject | Re: share COMPATIBLE_IOCTL()s across architectures |
| |
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.
Well, there are two of them... 600 lines of duplicated code is great for differences starting to creep in...
> 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)
Okay, I'll think what to do with it. Pavel
-- Horseback riding is like software... ...vgf orggre jura vgf serr. - 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/
| ![\](/images/icornerr.gif) |