Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: preempt-count oddities - still looking for comments :) | From | Robert Love <> | Date | Tue, 26 Apr 2005 16:28:37 -0400 |
| |
On Tue, 2005-04-26 at 22:05 +0200, Jesper Juhl wrote:
> Hmm, one downside to using "s32" instead of plain "int" is that not all > thread_info.h files get asm/types.h pulled in and then won't have that > type defined (m68knommu is one such as far as I can see). Would this make > "int" prefered after all or should I just include asm/types.h where needed > or just include it everywhere? seems logical that the file that uses > header includes it directly instead of it getting included implicitly by > other headers (like i386 where thread_info.h includes asm/page.h that then > includes asm/mmx.h that then includes linux/types.h that finally includes > asm/types.h). > Personally I'd just add the asm/types.h include to all the thread_info.h > files (or go back to using int) - what's your preference?
Well, guess it depends how much we like s32 over int. Both are identical on all supported architectures, so it is just a style issue, really.
If m68knommu is the only arch needing asm/typed.h included, I'd so just include it. If more and more arches need it, just go with int.
It is probably an easier sell.
Robert Love
- 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/
| |