Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 23 Nov 2002 16:16:28 +1100 | From | Anton Blanchard <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] Beginnings of conpat 32 code cleanups |
| |
> You're doing a compat layer, and then you're using various undefined types > that can be random sizes, and calling them xxx_t32. > > For christ sake, somebody is on drugs here.
Then it must be davem, Andi and I :) Stephen is just merging what we already have.
> If they are called "xxx_t32", then that means that you _know_ the size > already statically, and you should use "u32" or "s32" which are shorter > and clearer anyway. You should sure as hell not use some random C type > that can be different depending on compiler options etc, and then calling > it a "compat" library.
_t32 == 32 bit version, its not the size. eg
asm-ia64/ia32.h: typedef unsigned short __kernel_ipc_pid_t32; asm-mips64/posix_types.h: typedef int __kernel_ipc_pid_t32; asm-parisc/posix_types.h: typedef unsigned short __kernel_ipc_pid_t32; asm-ppc64/ppc32.h: typedef unsigned short __kernel_ipc_pid_t32; asm-sparc64/posix_types.h: typedef unsigned short __kernel_ipc_pid_t32; asm-x86_64/ia32.h: typedef unsigned short __kernel_ipc_pid_t32;
Or do you mean we should use typedef u16 __kernel_ipc_pid_t32? Yeah, I can understand that.
Anton - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |