On Wed, 23 Nov 2016, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 09:33:32AM +0000, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > > So, I still think the whole approach is wrong - it's added extra > > fragility that wasn't there with the armksyms.c approach. > > Here's what the diffstat and patch looks like when you combine the > original commit and the three fixes. The LoC delta of 25 lines can > be accounted for as deleted commentry. So, I think (as I've detailed > above) that the _technical_ benefit of the approach is very low. > > If we want to move the exports into assembly files, I've no problem > with that, provided we can do it better than this - and by better I > mean not creating the fragile asm-prototypes.h which divorses the > prototypes from everything else. I think we agree on that. I see that the revert made it to Linus' tree. That's probably the best outcome for now. I was working on that better solution I alluded to previously. And it isn't really complicated either, with much fewer lines of code. But this can wait for the next merge window. Nicolas -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arch" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
