From: Greg KH <greg@kroah.com>
To: john stultz <johnstul@us.ibm.com>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@transmeta.com>,
lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Dave Jones <davej@suse.de>,
Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
george anzinger <george@mvista.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] linux-2.5.40_timer-changes_A3 (3/3 - integration)
Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2002 00:28:16 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20021003072816.GA18846@kroah.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1033629234.13095.81.camel@cog>
On Thu, Oct 03, 2002 at 12:13:54AM -0700, john stultz wrote:
> On Wed, 2002-10-02 at 23:59, Greg KH wrote:
> > > +/* fwd declarations */
> >
> > These don't have to be forward declarations, do they?
> > And can they be static?
>
> Ummm. I could just be wrong, but since I'm setting structure elements to
> equal the functions before they are declared, I need the fwds (unless,
> of course I put the "struct timer_opts timer_pit" section below all the
> functions, which is doable).
That's a bit nicer, that way you don't have to declare it twice, but
it's not a big deal either way (no style rule here :)
> Also, since external functions are going to be calling these functions
> via the structure's function pointers, I believe they can't be static.
> Although, maybe they can, as long as the timer_pit value isn't static.
> I'm not that much of a C guru, so I'm really sure.
No, they can be static, and they should, to keep the namespace a bit
cleaner. The pointer itself isn't static, and all references to the
function goes through it, so the functions do not need to be global.
> > Shouldn't these 3 lines be above the "/* fwd declarations */" line?
>
> They could be, but I'm not sure about the necessity. Is this a coding
> style sorta' thing, or a C properness sort of thing? Either way is fine,
> I just don't follow the logic.
Just a "keep all #includes at the top of the file" type of thing, unless
it's absolutely necessary.
Hope this helps,
greg k-h
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-10-03 7:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-10-03 6:09 [PATCH] linux-2.5.40_timer-changes_A3 (1/3 - infrastructure) john stultz
2002-10-03 6:11 ` [PATCH] linux-2.5.40_timer-changes_A3 (2/3 - bulk move) john stultz
2002-10-03 6:12 ` [PATCH] linux-2.5.40_timer-changes_A3 (3/3 - integration) john stultz
2002-10-03 6:59 ` Greg KH
2002-10-03 7:13 ` john stultz
2002-10-03 7:28 ` Greg KH [this message]
2002-10-03 7:33 ` john stultz
2002-10-03 6:13 ` [RFC][PATCH] linux-2.5.40_cyclone-timer_B2 john stultz
2002-10-03 16:28 ` [PATCH] linux-2.5.40_timer-changes_A3 (1/3 - infrastructure) Patrick Mochel
2002-10-03 17:48 ` john stultz
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20021003072816.GA18846@kroah.com \
--to=greg@kroah.com \
--cc=alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk \
--cc=davej@suse.de \
--cc=george@mvista.com \
--cc=johnstul@us.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=torvalds@transmeta.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).