Re: Discourage duplicate symbols in the kernel? [Was: Intel I/O Acc...]

[Chris Leech]

On 3/5/06, Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Sam Ravnborg <sam@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > On Sun, Mar 05, 2006 at 12:09:33AM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> >  > > +
> >  > > +static inline u8 read_reg8(struct cb_device *device, unsigned int offset)
> >  > > +{
> >  > > +        return readb(device->reg_base + offset);
> >  > > +}
> >  >
> >  > These are fairly generic-sounding names.  In fact the as-yet-unmerged tiacx
> >  > wireless driver is already using these, privately to
> >  > drivers/net/wireless/tiacx/pci.c.
> >
> >  Do we in general discourage duplicate symbols even if they are static?
>
> Well, it's a bit irritating that it confuses ctags.  But in this case, one
> set is in a header file so the risk of collisions is much-increased.

They're in a header file that's specific to a single driver, so I
don't see where a conflict would occur.  But I didn't think about
ctags, and these can easily be prefixed so I'll go ahead and change
them.

- Chris
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/