[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <AANLkTikGJJsnAwiyhrS6m8TJQfR8UHCzZG+t=2GHFRiW@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2011 11:22:55 -0800
From: Mike Waychison <mikew@...gle.com>
To: Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Cc: Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
San Mehat <san@...gle.com>, Aaron Durbin <adurbin@...gle.com>,
Duncan Laurie <dlaurie@...gle.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Tim Hockin <thockin@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 3/6] driver: Google EFI SMI
On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 2:43 AM, Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk> wrote:
>> I understand that type widths change in a compat setting. So what?
>> Code in each environment is written to it's own namespace anyhow.
>
> So you ned up with a pile of extra crap in the kernel to handle 32bit
> userspace on 64bit and the like. If instead the structs are carefully
> laid out this doesn't occur.
>
>> Here's what *I* think *you* think about __u32 vs u32 vs uint32_t.
>> Correct me if I'm totally off-base here:
>
> And the __aligned_ ones for things like u64 in ioctls and structs...
>
> It's also a style and consistency thing, its trivialto use the same style
> as the rest of the kernel, it's trivial to tweak and it helps keep
> coherency of style, even if you are sitting at the keyboard mumbling
> "bunch of morons if you ask me" while doing it ;)
I'm always mumbling and cursing at my desk :p
I've already changed the series to not use C99 types. I understand
the value in style consistency :)
I'm still trying to understand if there is any actual technical merit
to avoid standard types though, of which there doesn't seem to be any.
Anyhow, I've attached a patch that fixes the style documentation.
Download attachment "patch" of type "application/octet-stream" (788 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists