On Mon, Jun 25, 2007 at 04:16:04PM -0700, ron minnich wrote: > Right, I did this arch/lib.h thing in response to a request; people > did not like arch/x86/lib.h in includes. I personally like it, as > it reduces "magic".
We shouldn't need "magic" - just some simple logic. Ie. 1:1 rules for what files go together - clear relationships between include/ and all that used to be in src/. > I would rather NOT have the arch directory, and i would rather NOT > have duplicate names like lib.h. include/lib.h currently has: log2, {u,m,}delay, beep_{short,long}, smbus_read_byte, ram_failure and ram_initialize. Shouldn't they just go into separate .h files? Or shouldn't all of the other files go into lib.h? I'm sorry if I've forgotten what we thought about all of this. > So, quick, somebody, make a suggestion. Where do we put > cpu-dependent library functions? cpu.h? Sounds good. In fact, include/arch/x86/cpu.h already has some (all?) of the code in the lx patch. //Peter -- linuxbios mailing list linuxbios@linuxbios.org http://www.linuxbios.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios