[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CA+55aFxfV0pTqxNN5yV5YsvMVxF2Dir6rwjk-AyRV6s94g10AA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 2 Feb 2012 18:00:10 -0800
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
Cc: linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Joel Becker <jlbec@...lplan.org>,
Chris Mason <chris.mason@...cle.com>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: Re: [RFC] killing boilerplate checks in ->link/->mkdir/->rename
On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 5:45 PM, Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk> wrote:
>
> Incidentally, why the hell do we have
> typedef __kernel_nlink_t nlink_t;
> anyway? It's *not* exposed to userland and it's different from the
> userland nlink_t (which is unsigned int on 32bit and unsigned long on 64bit).
> Why not use __kernel_nlink_t (or explicitly-sized __uNN) in
> arch/*/include/asm/stat.h and declare nlink_t kernel-side as __u32?
Probably hysterical raisins, and just converted to the whole
__kernel_nlink_t form together with other, more relevant things.
Feel free to remove it.
> Why do we have daddr_t, while we are at it? There is exactly one user -
> fs/freevxfs and there we definitely want a fixed-sized type.
I think it's something that probably came from freevxfs and BSD roots
or similar. It's a BSD'ism, afaik.
Linus
--
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