From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@kernel.org>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Cc: Sam Ravnborg <sam@ravnborg.org>, Helge Deller <deller@gmx.de>,
David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
jaswinder@kernel.org, mingo@elte.hu, x86@kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-parisc@vger.kernel.org,
Kyle McMartin <kyle@mcmartin.ca>
Subject: Re: Confusion in usr/include/asm-generic/fcntl.h
Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2009 08:44:56 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <49775108.7040200@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200901211313.17394.arnd@arndb.de>
Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>
> I would prefer using the __BITS_PER_LONG == 64 check directly, because
> it gives you a warning when __BITS_PER_LONG is undefined, whereas the
> #ifdef check gets easily fooled by include order problems. Note that
> this is not a problem in the kernel for CONFIG_* symbols which are
> always defined before the first #include.
>
I fully agree with this. It actually *is* a problem for CONFIG_*
symbols too, since people typo them all the time.
-hpa
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-01-21 16:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-01-21 0:04 Confusion in usr/include/asm-generic/fcntl.h Jaswinder Singh Rajput
2009-01-21 0:16 ` David Miller
2009-01-21 0:24 ` Arnd Bergmann
2009-01-21 0:32 ` David Miller
2009-01-21 8:13 ` Helge Deller
2009-01-21 8:24 ` Arnd Bergmann
2009-01-21 11:38 ` Sam Ravnborg
2009-01-21 12:13 ` Arnd Bergmann
2009-01-21 12:13 ` Arnd Bergmann
2009-01-21 14:29 ` Kyle McMartin
2009-01-21 14:29 ` Kyle McMartin
2009-01-21 16:44 ` H. Peter Anvin [this message]
2009-01-21 17:28 ` Sam Ravnborg
2009-01-21 17:28 ` Sam Ravnborg
2009-01-21 17:57 ` H. Peter Anvin
2009-01-27 22:35 ` Helge Deller
2009-01-21 22:25 ` Grant Grundler
2009-01-21 22:43 ` John David Anglin
2009-01-22 0:46 ` H. Peter Anvin
2009-01-22 2:52 ` John David Anglin
2009-01-22 2:56 ` H. Peter Anvin
2009-01-21 0:48 ` H. Peter Anvin
2009-01-21 1:47 ` H. Peter Anvin
2009-01-23 15:18 ` Jaswinder Singh Rajput
2009-01-26 15:53 ` Arnd Bergmann
2009-01-26 16:24 ` Jaswinder Singh Rajput
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=49775108.7040200@kernel.org \
--to=hpa@kernel.org \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=deller@gmx.de \
--cc=jaswinder@kernel.org \
--cc=kyle@mcmartin.ca \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-parisc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=sam@ravnborg.org \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.