Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sat, 29 Dec 2001 15:43:14 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sat, 29 Dec 2001 15:43:04 -0500 Received: from neon-gw-l3.transmeta.com ([63.209.4.196]:48902 "EHLO neon-gw.transmeta.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Sat, 29 Dec 2001 15:42:48 -0500 Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2001 12:40:23 -0800 (PST) From: Linus Torvalds To: Andrew Morton cc: Alexander Viro , Bernhard Rosenkraenzer , Subject: Re: [PATCH] exporting seq_* stuff In-Reply-To: <3C2E2875.8E2EF36D@zip.com.au> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org 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/