Date: Thu, 7 Jan 2010 22:43:34 +0100 From: Luigi Rizzo <rizzo@iet.unipi.it> To: Michael Tuexen <tuexen@freebsd.org>, src-committers@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, svn-src-head@freebsd.org Subject: Re: moving sctp to a separate directory ? (Re: svn commit: r201523 - head/sys/netinet) Message-ID: <20100107214334.GA35184@onelab2.iet.unipi.it> In-Reply-To: <20100107203536.GB8230@rincewind.paeps.cx> References: <201001041825.o04IPcXb043347@svn.freebsd.org> <20100104190024.GA47532@onelab2.iet.unipi.it> <517EF225-7EEB-4844-A0AD-019AD72F9403@freebsd.org> <20100104222323.GA49068@onelab2.iet.unipi.it> <20100107203536.GB8230@rincewind.paeps.cx>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, Jan 07, 2010 at 09:35:36PM +0100, Philip Paeps wrote: > On 2010-01-04 23:23:23 (+0100), Luigi Rizzo <rizzo@iet.unipi.it> wrote: > > This was the reason why I moved ipfw-related stuff out of the way > > and plan to do the same with tcp unless someone precedes me. > > Please discuss this on -net or so first. I have worked in an environment here we are :) > where tcp was moved out of netinet when it was imported (around 2.2.8-time) > and it opens the door to a number of strange phenomena. I think i know pretty well the problems involved, because I have done the process already for ipfw/ (so you can see how i proceeded) and this is not just related to the number of files but also to their size. I know that adding a few lines to a header, or a few functions to a file, is often quicker for the programmer than partitioning the files. But when files and directories become 3..10 times larger than their original version at least calls for a scrutiny of whether the content still fits the original design. > What do you do with udp, for instance? Compared to tcp and sctp, it's > trivial in terms of code, but it's an upper layer protocol from the > perspective of netinet/netinet6 - do we put it in its own directory too? > Also note that this won't only cause churn for people who have patches against > or (out-of-tree) branches from netinet/, but also in other kernel subsystems > which rely on tcp -- nfs, for instance. + I have no intention to move headers whose name constitutes a de-facto standard for userland apps; that would be stupid, as it would break a lot of stuff over which we have no control. + there is also no reason to move single files (such as udp) somewhere else. + i don't much follow the issue churn on nfs or kernel subsystems: .c files are not #included, and headers will be handled with due care, see above. Plus, we usually try to make the kernel buildable after such changes. + i find the concern about churn in external patchsets a bit weak, first of all because this is bound to happen unless we stop all development, and secondly because this kind of file moving or splitting happens once every 10-15 years which is well beyond the lifetime of a patchset. cheers luigi
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20100107214334.GA35184>