[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH V3] sort: Introduce generic list_sort function

To: Andi Kleen <andi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V3] sort: Introduce generic list_sort function
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 2010 12:23:19 -0500
Cc: Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx, Artem Bityutskiy <dedekind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Dave Airlie <airlied@xxxxxxxxxx>, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@xxxxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <20100105125234.GD1778@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <1262649295-28427-1-git-send-email-david__25057.2445955642$1262651404$gmane$org@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <87eim4dbzw.fsf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20100105122101.GR13802@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20100105125234.GD1778@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.19 (2009-01-05)
On Tue, Jan 05, 2010 at 01:52:35PM +0100, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > > Also it would seem cleaner to have it in a own file.
> > 
> > That might make sense if we had a large number of generic sort
> > functions and it was difficult to tell the code apart, but we've
> > only got 2 right now....
> I was more thinking of the case that it can be easily made a lib-y
> and then eliminated by the linker on non modular kernels if not needed
> (unfortunately that would require putting the EXPORT_SYMBOL somewhere else)

lib-y doesn't work together with EXPORT_SYMBOL, having the export
outside would also always pull it in.  These days the whole lib-y mess
doesn't make sense anymore - if we really need an optional library
symbol we can just pull it in through a Kconfig variable.

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>