[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAD=FV=VjYtXA5XHiuz-bULpW_MCBWxw2eTvg+SQz9CrgsER4AA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 2 Jan 2014 08:12:09 -0800
From: Doug Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>
To: Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>
Cc: linux-input@...r.kernel.org, Simon Glass <sjg@...omium.org>,
Vincent Palatin <vpalatin@...omium.org>,
Luigi Semenzato <semenzato@...omium.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Input: cros_ec_keyb - switch from using uint8_t to u8
Dmitry,
On Tue, Dec 31, 2013 at 11:34 AM, Dmitry Torokhov
<dmitry.torokhov@...il.com> wrote:
> u8 is proper in-kernel type for unsigned byte data.
I won't say that I keep up with all the latest trends here, but this
surprised me so I did some research. My findings don't agree with
your statement. Perhaps there are different standards that are used
for the input subsystem?
Specifically looking at
<https://www.kernel.org/doc/Documentation/CodingStyle>, I see:
Therefore, the Linux-specific 'u8/u16/u32/u64' types and their
signed equivalents which are identical to standard types are
permitted -- although they are not mandatory in new code of your
own.
When editing existing code which already uses one or the other set
of types, you should conform to the existing choices in that code.
That makes it sound like the author of that document would prefer
uint8_t but will accept u8. It also seems like if code is consistent
about using a given type (as this code is) that it shouldn't be
changed.
I'm always happy to be enlightened, though!
-Doug
--
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