Re: [PATCH] [IPVS] Shrink ip_vs_*.c includes

2006-02-08 Thread Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
On 2/8/06, Roberto Nibali <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I've thought about the linux/modules.h header (ignoring the fact > mentioned by Herbert because of its small chance of happening) and my > suggestion was/is to move it to ip_vs.h. I'll ping Arnaldo regarding > this cleanup, since he's done it

Re: [PATCH] [IPVS] Shrink ip_vs_*.c includes

2006-02-08 Thread Horms
On Tue, Feb 07, 2006 at 09:07:34PM -0800, David S. Miller wrote: > From: Horms <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Wed, 8 Feb 2006 12:09:29 +0900 > > > Unfortunately this seems like it is going to be more tedious than > > we first thought. I would guess writing some sort of tool to analyse > > symbols an

Re: [PATCH] [IPVS] Shrink ip_vs_*.c includes

2006-02-08 Thread Roberto Nibali
The correct way to go about this is to go through each included header file and check if any of its symbols are used in the source file. Or if this is too tedious just leave it alone. Hi Herbert, thanks for your feedback. Dave, please discard this patch for now. Ratz, Unfortunately thi

Re: [PATCH] [IPVS] Shrink ip_vs_*.c includes

2006-02-07 Thread David S. Miller
From: Horms <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Wed, 8 Feb 2006 12:09:29 +0900 > Unfortunately this seems like it is going to be more tedious than > we first thought. I would guess writing some sort of tool to analyse > symbols and headers is the way to go. Else it seems more or less > impossible to clean

Re: [PATCH] [IPVS] Shrink ip_vs_*.c includes

2006-02-07 Thread Ian McDonald
> Unfortunately this seems like it is going to be more tedious than > we first thought. I would guess writing some sort of tool to analyse > symbols and headers is the way to go. Else it seems more or less > impossible to clean up headers, even on a small scale. > Search the netdev archives or look

Re: [PATCH] [IPVS] Shrink ip_vs_*.c includes

2006-02-07 Thread Horms
On Wed, Feb 08, 2006 at 01:36:11PM +1100, Herbert Xu wrote: > Horms <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >> Looks bogus to me. Why are we removing linux/modules.h from ip_vs_app.c > >> when it uses things like EXPORT_SYMBOL? > > > > Given that the code still compiles, I guess linux/modules.h is inclu

Re: [PATCH] [IPVS] Shrink ip_vs_*.c includes

2006-02-07 Thread Herbert Xu
Horms <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Looks bogus to me. Why are we removing linux/modules.h from ip_vs_app.c >> when it uses things like EXPORT_SYMBOL? > > Given that the code still compiles, I guess linux/modules.h is included > in some other header that is included. I'm happy to put linux/modu

Re: [PATCH] [IPVS] Shrink ip_vs_*.c includes

2006-02-07 Thread Horms
On Wed, Feb 08, 2006 at 12:19:32PM +1100, Herbert Xu wrote: > Horms <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Dave, > > > > please apply. > > Looks bogus to me. Why are we removing linux/modules.h from ip_vs_app.c > when it uses things like EXPORT_SYMBOL? Given that the code still compiles, I guess linux

Re: [PATCH] [IPVS] Shrink ip_vs_*.c includes

2006-02-07 Thread Herbert Xu
Horms <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Dave, > > please apply. Looks bogus to me. Why are we removing linux/modules.h from ip_vs_app.c when it uses things like EXPORT_SYMBOL? -- Visit Openswan at http://www.openswan.org/ Email: Herbert Xu ~{PmV>HI~} <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Home Page: http://gondor.apa

[PATCH] [IPVS] Shrink ip_vs_*.c includes

2006-02-06 Thread Horms
Dave, please apply. -- Horms Hello, This patch against the latest GIT HEAD reduces the includes to the necessary ones. I've compile-tested it against following (and s/y/m/) configuration on x86: CONFIG_IP_VS=y CONFIG_IP_VS_DEBUG=y CONFIG_IP_VS_TAB_BITS=12 CONFIG_IP_VS_PROTO_TCP=y CONFIG_IP_