From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755011AbcE3OCA (ORCPT ); Mon, 30 May 2016 10:02:00 -0400 Received: from lists.s-osg.org ([54.187.51.154]:44242 "EHLO lists.s-osg.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754643AbcE3OB7 (ORCPT ); Mon, 30 May 2016 10:01:59 -0400 Message-ID: <574C47D2.20202@osg.samsung.com> Date: Mon, 30 May 2016 15:01:54 +0100 From: Luis de Bethencourt User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Icedove/31.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Ravishankar Karkala Mallikarjunayya , abbotti@mev.co.uk, hsweeten@visionengravers.com, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org CC: devel@driverdev.osuosl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] staging : comedi : fix type issues in s626.c References: <1464413211-7947-1-git-send-email-ravishankarkm32@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <1464413211-7947-1-git-send-email-ravishankarkm32@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 28/05/16 06:26, Ravishankar Karkala Mallikarjunayya wrote: > This is a patch to the s626.c file that fixes up a type issues like > i.e Prefer kernel type 'u8' over 'uint8_t' > Prefer kernel type 'u16' over 'uint16_t' > Prefer kernel type 'u32' over 'uint32_t' > Prefer kernel type 's16' over 'int16_t' > Prefer kernel type 's32' over 'int32_t' > found by the checkpatch.pl tool. > > Signed-off-by: Ravishankar Karkala Mallikarjunayya >>From the CodingStyle [0]: "Although it would only take a short amount of time for the eyes and brain to become accustomed to the standard types like 'uint32_t', some people object to their use anyway. Therefore, the Linux-specific 'u8/u16/u32/u64' types and their signed equivalents which are identical to standard types are permitted -- although they are not mandatory in new code of your own. When editing existing code which already uses one or the other set of types, you should conform to the existing choices in that code." Not sure why checkpatch complains about this when the CodingStyle suggests to conform to the choice in the existing code. Anybody can shed some light on this? Thanks, Luis [0] https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Documentation/CodingStyle#n318