From: Paolo G. <bla...@ya...> - 2006-08-29 08:30:18
|
Look there, it would be very useful IMHO for UML: http://lkml.org/lkml/2006/8/24/212 But I will not have the time for the UML changes, so tune in for them. Chiacchiera con i tuoi amici in tempo reale! http://it.yahoo.com/mail_it/foot/*http://it.messenger.yahoo.com |
From: Jeff D. <jd...@ad...> - 2006-09-12 17:09:48
|
On Tue, Aug 29, 2006 at 10:30:09AM +0200, Paolo Giarrusso wrote: > Look there, it would be very useful IMHO for UML: > > http://lkml.org/lkml/2006/8/24/212 Yeah, looks interesting, but a bunch of work. When you build a directory at a time, everything that is exposed to the outside needs to be declared __global. This is useful documentation in its own right, but it will take some time to do. Jeff |
From: Blaisorblade <bla...@ya...> - 2006-09-17 18:10:54
|
On Tuesday 12 September 2006 19:08, Jeff Dike wrote: > On Tue, Aug 29, 2006 at 10:30:09AM +0200, Paolo Giarrusso wrote: > > Look there, it would be very useful IMHO for UML: > > > > http://lkml.org/lkml/2006/8/24/212 > > Yeah, looks interesting, but a bunch of work. When you build a directory > at a time, I was thinking by thematic areas - for instance each _user with its _kern (there are still some such examples). Having little wrappers inlined (especially for some ones in the hot paths, I'm recalling something about mm fault handling or such) would help however, and could be prioritized. > everything that is exposed to the outside needs to be declared > __global. > This is useful documentation in its own right, but it will take some time > to do. Obviously... > Jeff -- Inform me of my mistakes, so I can keep imitating Homer Simpson's "Doh!". Paolo Giarrusso, aka Blaisorblade http://www.user-mode-linux.org/~blaisorblade Chiacchiera con i tuoi amici in tempo reale! http://it.yahoo.com/mail_it/foot/*http://it.messenger.yahoo.com |
From: Jeff D. <jd...@ad...> - 2006-09-19 15:22:45
|
On Sun, Sep 17, 2006 at 08:10:13PM +0200, Blaisorblade wrote: > I was thinking by thematic areas - for instance each _user with its _kern > (there are still some such examples). Having little wrappers inlined > (especially for some ones in the hot paths, I'm recalling something about mm > fault handling or such) would help however, and could be prioritized. That's an interesting idea. However, I'm trying to get rid of the _user/_kern pairs, and have mostly succeeded by now. We would have to pair up files in different directories. Jeff |