On Tuesday 30 October 2007 9:43:29 am James Bottomley wrote:
> On Tue, 2007-10-30 at 08:34 -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> > Randy Dunlap wrote:
> > > On Thu, 25 Oct 2007 16:40:35 -0500 Rob Landley wrote:
> > >> On Thursday 25 October 2007 12:32:41 pm Randy Dunlap wrote:
> > >>> !E is for exported symbols and that file has none.
> > >>> USe !I instead.
> > >>
> > >> So how do I handle a case like drivers/ata/libata-core.c which has
> > >> EXPORT_SYMBOL() calls for functions that live in (and are documented
> > >> in) other files, such as ata_scsi_ioctl() in
> > >> drivers/ata/libata-scsi.c?
...
> > Yeah I tended to prefer that all exports be in one place, rather than
> > scattered around and difficult to evaluate en masse :)
>
> My personal preference (and how I code) is export at the bottom of the
> function. However, it's one of those stylistic things that I'm happy to
> have people code however they want (either everything at the bottom of
> the file or all exports at the bottom of the exported function) as long
> as they follow the current style of whatever file they're patching.
Actually, this one is written up in CodingStyle:
> In source files, separate functions with one blank line. If the function
> is exported, the EXPORT* macro for it should follow immediately after the
> closing function brace line. E.g.:
>
> int system_is_up(void)
> {
> return system_state == SYSTEM_RUNNING;
> }
> EXPORT_SYMBOL(system_is_up);
The functional problem is that when the EXPORT_SYMBOL() is in a different file
entirely, the documentation infrastructure doesn't pick up that it's an
exported function.
> James
Rob
--
"One of my most productive days was throwing away 1000 lines of code."
- Ken Thompson.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
