On 30.04.2012 15:36, Gleb Smirnoff wrote:
On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 01:48:36PM +0200, Luigi Rizzo wrote:
L>  On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 10:22:23AM +0000, Alexander V. Chernikov wrote:
L>  >  Author: melifaro
L>  >  Date: Mon Apr 30 10:22:23 2012
L>  >  New Revision: 234834
L>  >  URL: http://svn.freebsd.org/changeset/base/234834
L>  >
L>  >  Log:
L>  >    Move several enums and structures required for L2 filtering from 
ip_fw_private.h to ip_fw.h.
L>
L>  I would be really grateful if you could revert this back and discuss
L>  what you wanted to achieve with this change other than saving one
L>  entry in the list of includes.
Changing something inside ip_fw_private.h (for example, locking change) requires changes in several totally unrelated subsystems, which is clearly bad.
L>
L>  As clearly mentioned in the commit logs
L>
L>      http://svnweb.freebsd.org/base?view=revision&revision=200580
Maybe there are some other possibilities documenting preferred layout other than commit log? Searching 2+yrs commit history is not the best way of finding information.

L>
L>  when i did the last revision of the ipfw+dummynet code i tried
L>  to put a strong separation between what is visible in userland
L>  (ip_fw.h and ip_dummynet.h) and kernel specific stuff.
L>  This way changes in the kernel code do not need to affect userland,
L>  modify installed headers and so on.
L>
L>  This is why kernel-specific definitions were put in private files.
Unfortunately, it is not so obvious (at least for me "ip_fw_ _private__.h" looks much like "ipfw private headers, used by ipfw subsystem only", not "kernel ipfw specific stuff").
L>  We may discuss on the filename, ip_fw_kernel.h may be a better fit,
Personally I prefer glebius@ suggestion with ip_fw_var.h for such common headers.
L>  but merging back kernel and userland defs is a bad design decision.
So should style(9) be updated with "_KERNEL define is bad" line to make newcomers aware of this "easy" way ? :)
L>
L>  20-30 years ago there were good reasons to use a single header
L>  for all sorts of definitions: user-only, kernel-only, and kernel-userland 
API.
L>  Machines were slow, disks were small, portability was not a big deal.
L>
L>  These days none of these conditions apply and keeping things
L>  separate helps maintainance and avoid accidental pollution of
L>  definitions and their misuse.
L>
L>  Besides, keep in mind that ipfw and dummynet are meant to work
L>  on multiple platforms so this change is causing portability troubles.

Can we split ip_fw_private.h to ip_fw_private.h, and ip_fw_var.h? The
former is really private, and the latter is for other kernel modules.



_______________________________________________
svn-src-head@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/svn-src-head
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "svn-src-head-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"

Reply via email to