From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757893AbXEUEwB (ORCPT ); Mon, 21 May 2007 00:52:01 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754303AbXEUEvx (ORCPT ); Mon, 21 May 2007 00:51:53 -0400 Received: from pasmtpa.tele.dk ([80.160.77.114]:57609 "EHLO pasmtpA.tele.dk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752864AbXEUEvx (ORCPT ); Mon, 21 May 2007 00:51:53 -0400 Date: Mon, 21 May 2007 06:52:49 +0200 From: Sam Ravnborg To: "Robert P. J. Day" Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List , Andrew Morton Subject: Re: [PATCH] Factor out common MODULE_INFO content from module*.h files. Message-ID: <20070521045249.GA30018@uranus.ravnborg.org> References: <20070520191552.GA25200@uranus.ravnborg.org> <20070520205116.GB25339@uranus.ravnborg.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > > under the circumstances, is there *any* cleanup worth doing WRT to > this issue? because of the fact that module.h currently includes > moduleparam.h, developers have been able to get away with being > incredibly sloppy in their includes. It is wortwhile to make module.h independent of moduleparam.h. The MODULE_INFO stuff has nothing to do with module parameters. But keep the include so you do not break the > 500 drivers. Sam