Re: [RFQ] New driver architecture questions

[Jeff Garzik]

Julian Calaby wrote:
> On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 10:58, adam radford <aradford@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 9:16 PM, Jeff Garzik <jeff@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > Taking drivers/net/e1000e as an
> > > example,
> > >
> > >        hw.h            hardware-specific defines, ~cross-OS
> > >        82571.c         code specific to 8257x chip family, ~cross-OS
> > 82571.c contains Linux specific code such as:  including Linux
> > specific header files, calls to msleep().
> >
> > >        ich8lan.c       code specific to ICH8+ chip family, ~cross-OS
> > ich8lan.c contains Linux specific code such as:  might_sleep(),
> > mutex_trylock(), mutex_unlock(), udelay(), msleep(), writel(), readl().
> >
> > Perhaps this is a bad example?  It seems like the "common layer"
> > sections that are "cross-OS" shouldn't contain any Linux specific code at all.
>
> I think the implication is that the cross-OS parts are coded, as it
> happens, in the linux coding style, using linux functions, but then a
> Windows layer maps these to Windows specific functions.

Correct.

	Jeff




--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/