From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932321AbWDBAUB (ORCPT ); Sat, 1 Apr 2006 19:20:01 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932323AbWDBAUB (ORCPT ); Sat, 1 Apr 2006 19:20:01 -0500 Received: from xenotime.net ([66.160.160.81]:45499 "HELO xenotime.net") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S932321AbWDBAUB (ORCPT ); Sat, 1 Apr 2006 19:20:01 -0500 Date: Sat, 1 Apr 2006 16:22:13 -0800 From: "Randy.Dunlap" To: Pavel Machek Cc: mrmacman_g4@mac.com, arjan@infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, nix@esperi.org.uk, rob@landley.net, mmazur@kernel.pl, llh-discuss@lists.pld-linux.org Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/2] Create initial kernel ABI header infrastructure Message-Id: <20060401162213.dc68d120.rdunlap@xenotime.net> In-Reply-To: <20060329222640.GA2755@ucw.cz> References: <200603141619.36609.mmazur@kernel.pl> <200603231811.26546.mmazur@kernel.pl> <200603241623.49861.rob@landley.net> <878xqzpl8g.fsf@hades.wkstn.nix> <20060326065205.d691539c.mrmacman_g4@mac.com> <20060326065416.93d5ce68.mrmacman_g4@mac.com> <1143376351.3064.9.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> <20060329222640.GA2755@ucw.cz> Organization: YPO4 X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 2.2.4 (GTK+ 2.8.3; x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 29 Mar 2006 22:26:41 +0000 Pavel Machek wrote: > Hi! > > > I plan to add a lot of other definitions to this file > > later on. For example different architectures have > > different notions of what a __kernel_ino_t is (unsigned > > int versus unsigned long). I may rename this file as > > types.h, but from looking through the code I figure I'll > > have enough general purpose declarations about "This > > architecture has blah" that a separate stddef.h file > > will be worth it. > > > > >(and... why do you prefix these with _KABI? that's a > > >mistake imo. Don't bother with that. Really. Either > > >these need exporting to userspace, but then either use > > >__ as prefix or don't use a prefix. But KABI.. No.) > > > > According to the various standards all symbols beginning > > with __ are reserved for "The Implementation", including > > the compiler, the standard library, the kernel, etc. In > > order to avoid clashing with any/all of those, I picked > > the __KABI_ and __kabi_ prefixes for uniqueness. In > > theory I could just use __, but there are problems with > > that too. For example, note how the current compiler.h > > files redefine __always_inline to mean something kinda > > different. The GCC manual says we should be able to > > write this: > > __KABI_ everywhere will just make your headers totally unreadable. > Please don't do that. Ack, I agree. --- ~Randy