[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.21.2209202144070.41633@angie.orcam.me.uk>
Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2022 00:35:47 +0100 (BST)
From: "Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@...am.me.uk>
To: Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@...nel.org>
cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org>,
Anders Blomdell <anders.blomdell@...trol.lth.se>,
linux-serial@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] serial: 8250: Let drivers request full 16550A feature
probing
On Mon, 19 Sep 2022, Jiri Slaby wrote:
> > > Why __u64 and not u64?
> >
> > For consistency as there's `__u32' used elsewhere in this file. It's not
> > clear to me what our rules WRT the use of `s*'/`u*' vs `__s*'/`__u*' are.
> > I don't think we have it mentioned under Documentation/. Please clarify
> > if you know and I can update the change accordingly.
>
> The rule is, AFAICT, use __u*/__s* in user (uapi) headers. Everywhere else,
> use u*/s*.
Fair enough, that's consistent with ISO C's designation of identifiers
whose names start with an underscore as reserved (for system use, etc.).
Maciej
Powered by blists - more mailing lists