From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Daney Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/10] Use __kernel_long_t in struct timex Date: Thu, 17 May 2012 16:51:17 -0700 Message-ID: <4FB58EF5.2090306@gmail.com> References: <1337292816-10839-1-git-send-email-hjl.tools@gmail.com> <1337292816-10839-2-git-send-email-hjl.tools@gmail.com> <4FB57EB2.4050208@zytor.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mail-pz0-f46.google.com ([209.85.210.46]:64490 "EHLO mail-pz0-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753709Ab2EQXvT (ORCPT ); Thu, 17 May 2012 19:51:19 -0400 In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Linus Torvalds Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" , "H.J. Lu" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, mingo@kernel.org, tglx@linutronix.de On 05/17/2012 03:56 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 3:50 PM, Linus Torvalds > wrote: >> >> I think __word would be good too, *except* for the fact that >> especially in x86 land, I think there's the legacy confusion with >> "word" being 16-bit. Ugh. > > Looking at the x32 case, I have to say that "long" in general looks > horrible. Especially when we have things like > > typedef long long __kernel_long_t; > > (and __long really wouldn't look any nicer). Any sane person would go > "Eww" at looking at that - we're using 'long long' to typedef a type > that is named 'long'. > > It would make much more sense to use "__word" for reasons like that. > But I really don't think that works well in a x86 context. > > Other ideas? Maybe "__wordsize" would be less associated with x86 16-bit words? > FWIW: "__abi_wordsize" to indicate that it is not really a property of the machine itself, but rather the ABI in use. David Daney