[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1484182760.3065.3.camel@perches.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2017 16:59:20 -0800
From: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux@...musvillemoes.dk,
arnd.bergmann@...aro.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] lib/vsnprintf: Add %par specifier for sake of
consistency
On Wed, 2017-01-11 at 15:57 -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Wed, 11 Jan 2017 18:28:07 +0200 Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
>
> > While resource_size_t is repeating phys_addr_t, allocate %par specifier for
> > that type for sake of consistency.
> >
>
> I'm struggling to see the value in this. A more detailed changelog
> would help, explaining why you think the kernel would benefit from
> this.
>
> Are there callsites which should be converted? If so, a patch which
> does at least some of those would be helpful.
A resource_size_t isn't a different size than a phys_addr_t.
Not so far anyway.
$ git grep typedef.*resource_size_t include
include/linux/types.h:typedef phys_addr_t resource_size_t;
Is there an arch that needs a different size?
If not, why add another case?
Just to make the kernel larger?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists