From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S267931AbUGaJ5a (ORCPT ); Sat, 31 Jul 2004 05:57:30 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S267930AbUGaJ5a (ORCPT ); Sat, 31 Jul 2004 05:57:30 -0400 Received: from rwcrmhc13.comcast.net ([204.127.198.39]:41098 "EHLO rwcrmhc13.comcast.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S267931AbUGaJ5Y (ORCPT ); Sat, 31 Jul 2004 05:57:24 -0400 Subject: Re: drm - first steps towards 64-bit correctness.. From: Eric Anholt To: arjanv@redhat.com Cc: Dave Airlie , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, DRI In-Reply-To: <1091267687.2819.3.camel@laptop.fenrus.com> References: <1091266345.425.34.camel@leguin> <1091267687.2819.3.camel@laptop.fenrus.com> Content-Type: text/plain Message-Id: <1091267836.425.46.camel@leguin> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.4.6 Date: Sat, 31 Jul 2004 02:57:17 -0700 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sat, 2004-07-31 at 02:54, Arjan van de Ven wrote: > On Sat, 2004-07-31 at 11:32, Eric Anholt wrote: > > As long as you don't use the linux-y > > "u32"-type types, BSD should be happy with the changes. > > can you explain why u32 would be outlawed? Surely it's trivial to do a > typedef for u32 on BSD for drm ?? If there are nice standard types (uint32_t or u_int32_t, can't remember which at the moment, I mentioned it in an email some time ago) out there already that linux has too, why not use those? -- Eric Anholt eta@lclark.edu http://people.freebsd.org/~anholt/ anholt@FreeBSD.org