[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAHp75VcbUOuQ9_2VL9mcs3e1x=ZOV5yd+c1U_iE24G5k-Uk7AA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 9 Jul 2023 21:14:27 +0300
From: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
To: xuanzhenggang001@...suo.com
Cc: ardb@...nel.org, mingo@...hat.com, bp@...en8.de,
dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com, platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, dvhart@...radead.org,
andy@...radead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] efi: x86: prefer 'unsigned int' to bare use of 'unsigned'
On Sun, Jul 9, 2023 at 5:20 AM <xuanzhenggang001@...suo.com> wrote:
>
> This patch fixes the following checkpatch warning:
> arch/x86/platform/efi/efi_64.c:109: WARNING: Prefer 'unsigned int' to
> bare use of 'unsigned'
> arch/x86/platform/efi/efi_64.c:177: WARNING: Prefer 'unsigned int' to
> bare use of 'unsigned'
> arch/x86/platform/efi/efi_64.c:182: WARNING: Prefer 'unsigned int' to
> bare use of 'unsigned'
> -int __init efi_setup_page_tables(unsigned long pa_memmap, unsigned
> num_pages)
> +int __init efi_setup_page_tables(unsigned long pa_memmap, unsigned int
> num_pages)
Nice, but you shouldn't just blindly do some mechanic "fixes". Now
your patch makes differences between the function prototype and its
implementation.
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists