[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <489D2BE9.4070206@keyaccess.nl>
Date: Sat, 09 Aug 2008 07:32:25 +0200
From: Rene Herman <rene.herman@...access.nl>
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
CC: Bjorn Helgaas <bjorn.helgaas@...com>,
Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>
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.
--
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