Messages in this thread | | | From | Andries.Brouwer@cwi ... | Date | Sun, 20 Apr 2003 23:26:24 +0200 (MEST) | Subject | Re: [PATCH] new system call mknod64 |
| |
From davem@redhat.com Sun Apr 20 23:12:17 2003
> Yesterday or the day before Linus preferred __u32 etc for this > loopinfo64 ioctl, so I did it that way. Here, since mknod is a > traditional Unix system call, I am still inclined to prefer > (unsigned) int above __u32. Of course it doesn't matter much.
To 64-bit platforms implementing 32-bit compatability layers, it can matter a ton to use portable vs. non-portable types.
Such an abstract statement nobody can disagree with. Do you have an opinion in the mknod case?
(For example, I do not suppose anybody would argue that open() should return an __u32 instead of an int.)
Andries - 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/
| |