linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] LinuxPPS (with new syscalls API)

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20070701192755.GX13886@enneenne.com>
Date:	Sun, 1 Jul 2007 21:27:55 +0200
From:	Rodolfo Giometti <giometti@...eenne.com>
To:	David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] LinuxPPS (with new syscalls API) - new version

On Sun, Jul 01, 2007 at 01:03:11PM +0100, David Woodhouse wrote:
> 
> Seems reasonable enough in principle -- but whatever you do, don't use
> "long" for it. That would definitely need different behaviour for 32-bit
> vs. 64-bit. Use explicitly sized types such as uint32_t or uint64_t.

Which is the difference in using __u32 or uint32_t? Maybe is better
defining the new struct as follow?

    struct pps_timedata_s {
       uint32_t sec;
       uint32_t nsec;
    }

or as:

    struct pps_timedata_s {
	__u32 sec;
	__u32 nsec;
    }

?

Thanks,

Rodolfo

-- 

GNU/Linux Solutions                  e-mail:    giometti@...eenne.com
Linux Device Driver                             giometti@...dd.com
Embedded Systems                     		giometti@...ux.it
UNIX programming                     phone:     +39 349 2432127
-
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/