linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] types.h: implement intptr_t and uintptr

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: <20120620230232.GN30705@dastard>
Date:	Thu, 21 Jun 2012 09:02:32 +1000
From:	Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>
To:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
Cc:	Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@...i.de>, xfs@....sgi.com, joe@...ches.com,
	bpm@....com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] types.h: implement intptr_t and uintptr_t

On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 03:52:16AM -0400, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> I'd really like to get Jans type cleanups in XFS in for the next
> merge window.  Given the lack of feedback on lkml in favor or
> against (u)intptr_t I'm tempted to add them to xfs_linux.h for now,
> and then do another push to propagate them to kernel-wide types later.
> 
> Is that fine with everybody?

I'd just push it into the XFS tree and into linux-next. It's a
relatively harmless set of changes, and if nobody cares enough about
it except us, just push it and see what happens when people start
noticing the conflicts it might cause....

Cheers,

Dave.
-- 
Dave Chinner
david@...morbit.com
--
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/