Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [patch] fat/msdos/vfat crud removal | From | OGAWA Hirofumi <> | Date | Sun, 09 Jun 2002 15:32:26 +0900 |
| |
"Albert D. Cahalan" <acahalan@cs.uml.edu> writes:
> OGAWA Hirofumi writes: > > "Albert D. Cahalan" <acahalan@cs.uml.edu> writes: > >> OGAWA Hirofumi writes: > >>> "Albert D. Cahalan" <acahalan@cs.uml.edu> writes: > > >>>> - * Conversion from and to little-endian byte order. (no-op on i386/i486) > >>>> - * > >>>> - * Naming: Ca_b_c, where a: F = from, T = to, b: LE = little-endian, > >>>> - * BE = big-endian, c: W = word (16 bits), L = longword (32 bits) > >>>> - */ > >>>> - > >>>> -#define CF_LE_W(v) le16_to_cpu(v) > >>>> -#define CF_LE_L(v) le32_to_cpu(v) > >>>> -#define CT_LE_W(v) cpu_to_le16(v) > >>>> -#define CT_LE_L(v) cpu_to_le32(v) > >>> > >>> Personally I think this patch makes code readable. But please don't > >>> remove Cx_LE_x macros. Cx_LE_x is used from dosfsck. > >> > >> Then the macros should be put in dosfsck, which is not > >> part of the kernel. > > > > Why do we throw away backward compatible? > > 1. app source code isn't supposed to use raw kernel headers > 2. existing executables are not affected > 3. the 2.5.xx series has already broken much more > 4. it's crud for the kernel; it's crud for user code > 5. the kernel shouldn't contain misc. user app code
Why is there __KERNEL__ macro?
> Use the packed attribute on the struct, along with > the right types. I don't think you need get_unaligned > with a packed struct, because gcc will know that it > needs to emit code for unaligned data.
OK. Please send patch. -- OGAWA Hirofumi <hirofumi@mail.parknet.co.jp> - 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/
| |