Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 22 Sep 2009 08:37:50 -0400 (EDT) | From | "Robert P. J. Day" <> | Subject | Re: best practices: which "uaccess.h" should one include? |
| |
On Tue, 22 Sep 2009, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Tuesday 22 September 2009, Robert P. J. Day wrote: > > philosophically, which is the "correct" uaccess.h header file to > > include in kernel code -- <linux/uaccess.h> or <asm/uaccess.h>? > > the first explicitly includes the second so that's a safe choice > > but, generally, there's been a tendency to shift toward including > > the "linux" header files. opinion? there's quite a mixture under > > the drivers/ directory. > > The preferred one is linux/uaccess.h, the same is true for many > headers that traditionally only existed in asm/.
i know -- i've sent in a few patches of my own to make some of those changes. i just wanted to be clear since i'm writing a short tutorial on kernel/user space copying and wanted to make the correct recommendation for the header file to include.
> There are some headers with explicit #warning or #error messages > when they are not included from linux/foo.h, e.g. spinlock_types.h, > bitops.h or rwsem.h.
yup, i've seen those, too. thanks.
rday --
======================================================================== Robert P. J. Day Waterloo, Ontario, CANADA
Linux Consulting, Training and Annoying Kernel Pedantry.
Web page: http://crashcourse.ca Twitter: http://twitter.com/rpjday ========================================================================
| |