[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <49EF37FC.8020909@nortel.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2009 09:30:04 -0600
From: "Chris Friesen" <cfriesen@...tel.com>
To: Jon Hunter <jon-hunter@...com>
CC: john stultz <johnstul@...ibm.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] Dynamic Tick: Allow 32-bit machines to sleep for
more than 2.15 seconds
Jon Hunter wrote:
> So this
> assumes that long long will be a 64-bit type which I don't like.
> However, this would not cause any compilation issues even if long long
> turned out to be 32-bits or 128-bits (if this is even possible).
Isn't "long long" guaranteed to be 64-bit on all linux systems?
Unless the width is critical, I'd prefer to stay away from u64 until it
gets unified between architectures. I recently ran into a problem
printk-ing a "u64" value because it was a different type on ppc64 than
x86-64.
Chris
--
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