Messages in this thread | | | From | Mike Frysinger <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] x86 byteorder.h: use __asm__/__inline__ for userspace | Date | Sat, 27 Dec 2008 14:21:07 -0500 |
| |
On Saturday 27 December 2008 14:15:01 H. Peter Anvin wrote: > Sam Ravnborg wrote: > > On Sat, Dec 27, 2008 at 10:58:11AM -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > >> Sam Ravnborg wrote: > >>> I wnet with the scripted conversion for now. > >>> If that does not fly we can come back to this proposal. > >>> > >>> What I like most with the auto conversion is that we avoid > >>> adding yet another special rule about how to do stuff in exported > >>> headers. > >> > >> Indeed, and being keyword conversion, it's independent of context, at > >> least as long as one doesn't have too many run-ins with weird uses of > >> the # and ## preprocessor operators, which are a *lot* easier to rule > >> out globally. > > > > Speaking of what we want to use in exported headers. > > What is the recommendation with respect to uint32_t and friends? > > To my best knowledge they are banned in exported headers as they > > are not part of the kernel namespace and I see few users too. > > But is this something we should check for? > > I personally would not be upset if we auto-changed {su}{8,16,32,64}, > [u]int_{8,16,32,64}_t
{su}{8,16,32,64} doesnt matter too much to me vs {u,}int_t{8,16,32,64}_t. as long as people stop using __{su}{8,16,32,64}. using the latter though does mean headers will more likely be "just usable" w/out needing linux/types.h include. but then people would be forced to include stdint.h or similar before a linux header ... and that sucks.
unless of course we start adding appropriate C library includes for !__KERNEL__ ... i'd love that personally
> and bool into the appropriate __{su}{8,16,32,64} > types and _Bool.
i dont get your bool comment. the "bool" type is already a standard type. there is no conversion needed. -mike [unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature] | |