From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755263AbZKCKCa (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Nov 2009 05:02:30 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751150AbZKCKCa (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Nov 2009 05:02:30 -0500 Received: from pfepb.post.tele.dk ([195.41.46.236]:55511 "EHLO pfepb.post.tele.dk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750796AbZKCKC3 (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Nov 2009 05:02:29 -0500 Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2009 11:02:32 +0100 From: Sam Ravnborg To: Huang Ying Cc: Andrew Morton , Joe Perches , Steven Whitehouse , Laurent Pinchart , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: [RFC 2/2] Use unified UUID/GUID definition in gfs2 Message-ID: <20091103100232.GA489@merkur.ravnborg.org> References: <1255501807.6047.1193.camel@yhuang-dev.sh.intel.com> <20091101093545.a7a4693a.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <1257123583.30470.1161.camel@yhuang-dev.sh.intel.com> <20091102150221.948d8427.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <1257209088.30470.1171.camel@yhuang-dev.sh.intel.com> <20091102170249.d1bf0aea.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <1257232919.22519.40.camel@yhuang-dev.sh.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1257232919.22519.40.camel@yhuang-dev.sh.intel.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Nov 03, 2009 at 03:21:59PM +0800, Huang Ying wrote: > On Tue, 2009-11-03 at 09:02 +0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > > On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 08:44:48 +0800 > > Huang Ying wrote: > > > > > For stuff of no use to user space, I think it can be enclosed into > > > > > > #ifdef __KERNEL__ > > > #endif > > > > It can, but that's ugly. Clearly separating the inclusions into uuid-kernel.h > > and uuid-user-h is nicer, no? > > But it seems that __KERNEL__ is common used method now. There are about > 370 out of 3085 files under linux/include use __KERNEL__. Just because we were sloopy in the past is no excuse for repeating this. Sam