linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 01/10] Use __kernel_long

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: <4FB581D5.9010606@zytor.com>
Date:	Thu, 17 May 2012 15:55:17 -0700
From:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
CC:	"H.J. Lu" <hjl.tools@...il.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...nel.org, tglx@...utronix.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/10] Use __kernel_long_t in struct timex

On 05/17/2012 03:50 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> Yes, I do think this is closer to the "__u32" kind of usage, and in
> general I tend to think that's true of most of the __kernel_ prefix
> things. There is very little "kernely" things about it.

The only think "kernely" about it is that it describes the kernel ABI.

> Yes, we have to have the double underscore (or single+capitalized),
> but I think that at least personally, I'd be happier with just
> "__long" and "__ulong".

I would suggest __slong and __ulong then, to keep with the __[su]*
namespace, or does the extra "s" look too much like crap?

	-hpa

-- 
H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center
I work for Intel.  I don't speak on their behalf.
--
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/