Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 09 Aug 2008 07:32:25 +0200 | From | Rene Herman <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] PNP: make the resource type an unsigned long |
| |
On 09-08-08 07:25, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>>> Seems a bit pointless ... either one of those flags is >= 32 bits, in >>> which case we need u64, or it's not, in which case there is no reason >>> to burden the output with bits we don't need. >> >> Yes, it's a not a functional patch -- only a type-consistency one. >> Right now we're mixing ints (signed ones even) and unsigned longs and >> while in this case that's not a functional problem it's messy and >> inconsistent. >> >> I agree (as Andrew said earlier as well) that the struct resource >> flags member should probably just be a u32 but it's not. Changing that >> would be a bigger change than just a simple conistency thing. >> > > You're going in the wrong direction for consistency. long is different > on 32 and 64 bits, and really should be avoided unless that is intended.
I know and fair enough but changing struct resource is just a bit too central for my tastes.
<shrug>
Rene.
| |