On Sat, 29 Dec 2001, Andrew Morton wrote:
>
> Personally, I prefer to see the EXPORT_SYMBOL() near the
> definition of the thing being exported. For functions, the
> convention I like is:
I'd rather have them in the same source-file, but not spread around in the
file. It's nice to see _what_ a file exports, without having to grep for
them.
HOWEVER, putting them in many different source-files makes compilation
slower, so I personally avoid that unless one source-file is clearly
important enough to do so. For core functionality where we clearly export
the functions to the rest of the kernel through a header file anyway, we
might as well keep the EXPORT_SYMBOL's central, and speed up kernel
builds that way.
> I'd propose that we drop the concept of EXPORT_OBJ by making all
> files eligible for exporting symbols, and that the janitors be given
> a mandate to scrap the ksyms files.
>
> Is this acceptable?
No. Check the speed of "make dep" with every single file exporting
objects. Not pretty.
Linus
-
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 : Mon Dec 31 2001 - 21:00:21 EST