Re: [PATCH] Linux: Implement membarrier function

[Florian Weimer <fweimer at redhat dot com>]

* Adhemerval Zanella:

> On 05/12/2018 12:51, Florian Weimer wrote:
>> * Adhemerval Zanella:
>> 
>>> If we are replicating the values, meaning the idea is to keep it sync at least
>>> when we have the minimum supported kernel of 4.16, why just not add a comment
>>> to add linux/membarrier.h once the minimum supported kernel provides this
>>> header and not rely on linux/membarrier.h?
>> 
>> This way, we can compile the test with any supported kernel headers for
>> glibc.
>> 
>> If we defer to <linux/membarrier.h> unconditionally, we cannot build the
>> test with all kernel headers.  The current approach definitely makes the
>> test case much cleaner.
>> 
>
> My point is exactly to *not* rely on kernel headers.

I thought there was a general desire to move in the opposite direction,
avoiding copying declarations and definitions in clean/new headers that
are dedicated to a specific purpose?

I don't think we can add much value by copying the contents of those
headers.  We can even relax the version check if we use __has_include
(which has to be remain optional in installed headers, of course).

Thanks,
Florian