Re: [PATCH 0/22] Introducing asm/syscalls.h
From: Jaswinder Singh
Date: Mon Jul 21 2008 - 01:46:28 EST
On Mon, 2008-07-21 at 04:28 +0400, Alexey Dobriyan wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 03:51:40AM +0530, Jaswinder Singh wrote:
> > The following series of patches introduce asm/syscalls.h in various
> > architectures.
> Copyright for a bunch of prototypes?
ïSo according to you, there _should_ be no copyright for header files.
If this is the case, then remove it, I have no objections :)
> All those /* kernel/signal.c */ comments are generally stupid and
> useless, so no point adding even for functions that rarely move
> Of course, there is no explanation why files are being added.
It may be useless for you but it looks useful for me.
If you go though all syscalls patches only then you will figure it out
syscalls are moving in many files for many architecture.
There can be many reasons to add syscalls.h, few of them are :-
1. Declaring syscalls functions before they get used is a nice habit and
will quite also quiet sparse.
2. Declaring all arch dependent syscalls under one roof is nice for
future enhancement for kernel developers as they can see what is defined
in other architectures and try to follow same prototype as far as
possible, Then it will be really useful for everyone. And then we can
move common arch dependent syscalls in one place.
3. ïDeclaring all arch dependent syscalls under one roof is nice for
user for reference purpose.
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/