"Randy.Dunlap" wrote:
>
> Morten Helgesen wrote:
> >
> > Hey David.
> >
> > I see your point - but someone has obiously decided to switch from malloc.h to slab.h, and I do not
> > see the point in having three references to malloc.h when malloc.h only prints a warning and then includes
> > slab.h
> >
> > == Morten
> >
> > On Thu, Nov 22, 2001 at 01:54:29PM +0000, David Woodhouse wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > admin@nextframe.net said:
> > > > Ok people - stop submitting patches which include malloc.h. Include
> > > > slab.h instead. :)
> > >
> > > Bah. I was sort of hoping we'd come to our collective senses and switch
> > > them all back.
> > >
> > > What does malloc.h do? Stuff to do with memory allocation, one presumes.
> > > What does slab.h do? Some random implementation detail that people have no
> > > business knowing about.
>
> Too bad someone decided to change. I agree with David.
>
> malloc.h is just too plain obvious, I suppose.
> slab.h is only an implementation detail.
Water under the bridge... someone should have spoken up long ago :)
malloc.h has been an empty shell for years and years, and I do not see
how the API benefits from this. Does "malloc" exist in kernel code?
No. kmalloc does... so it's arguably already misnamed as well as
superfluous.
Jeff
-- Jeff Garzik | Only so many songs can be sung Building 1024 | with two lips, two lungs, and one tongue. MandrakeSoft | - nomeansno- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Nov 30 2001 - 21:00:17 EST