[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20070220152259.GD3170@thunk.org>
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2007 10:22:59 -0500
From: Theodore Tso <tytso@....edu>
To: David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>
Cc: Artem Bityutskiy <dedekind@...radead.org>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Frank Haverkamp <haver@...t.ibm.com>,
Josh Boyer <jwboyer@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 05/44 take 2] [UBI] internal common header
On Tue, Feb 20, 2007 at 03:15:55PM +0000, David Woodhouse wrote:
> > It would be much better to use __be32 and __be64, so you get better
> > type checking, and you will catch bugs caused by forgetting to use
> > be32_to_cpu, et. al.
>
> The technique Artem uses is derived from what I do in JFFS2. It predates
> the use of sparse to catch such errors, and works in gcc for _everyone_
> without having to do anything special (like run sparse).
But __be32 will catch the same errors these days because the be/le
types use __bitwise now, right? So use of the __be32/__be64 types should
be preferred since it also will work with sparse, I would think.
Regards,
- Ted
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists