From owner-freebsd-smp Sun Apr 29 23:43:38 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Received: from gratis.grondar.za (grouter.grondar.za [196.7.18.65]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5252E37B423 for ; Sun, 29 Apr 2001 23:43:32 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from mark@grondar.za) Received: from grondar.za (gratis.grondar.za [196.7.18.133]) by gratis.grondar.za (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id f3U6hIp31951; Mon, 30 Apr 2001 08:43:20 +0200 (SAST) (envelope-from mark@grondar.za) Message-Id: <200104300643.f3U6hIp31951@gratis.grondar.za> To: Bruce Evans Cc: smp@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: sys/mutex.h sys/lock.h (and other) cleanups. Commit Candidate #2 References: In-Reply-To: ; from Bruce Evans "Mon, 30 Apr 2001 11:23:08 +1000." Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 08:44:36 +0200 From: Mark Murray Sender: owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Said Bruce Evans : > Actually, the deprecation consists of including instead > of in some headers that only need the former. > is not such a header, but it still includes although this > is more bogus than before. The verbose comment before this include has > been copied to to many places (more than 0). Previously said BDE: > The mess for is much older and messier than for . > Now, is sort of an extension of , but most places > that include it are for its (intentional) side effect of including the > old lock interface, . The old lock interface will be going > away, so we shouldn't move the include of to *.c. OTOH, > the entanglement of makes it difficult to include > in the right places (if any). I think the next step should > be to include instead of in *.h. I'm confused. Does sys/lockmgr.h go into sys/lock.h for its intentional side effects or not? M -- Mark Murray Warning: this .sig is umop ap!sdn To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message