From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from relay.sgi.com (relay3.corp.sgi.com [198.149.34.15]) by oss.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 82C467CA0 for ; Tue, 23 Aug 2016 17:36:57 -0500 (CDT) Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda2.sgi.com [192.48.176.25]) by relay3.corp.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 07922AC003 for ; Tue, 23 Aug 2016 15:36:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ipmail04.adl6.internode.on.net (ipmail04.adl6.internode.on.net [150.101.137.141]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id Z9G7r2ePKY8SXyKB for ; Tue, 23 Aug 2016 15:36:50 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2016 08:35:00 +1000 From: Dave Chinner Subject: Re: [PATCH] xfs: kill __uint*_t and __int*_t Message-ID: <20160823223500.GZ19025@dastard> References: <20160807173835.GA20839@nyan> <20160809083332.GA1489@infradead.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20160809083332.GA1489@infradead.org> List-Id: XFS Filesystem from SGI List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: Christoph Hellwig Cc: Felix Janda , xfs@oss.sgi.com On Tue, Aug 09, 2016 at 01:33:32AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Sun, Aug 07, 2016 at 07:38:35PM +0200, Felix Janda wrote: > > Replace them by the more widely used uint*_t and int*_t. > > > > Signed-off-by: Felix Janda > > --- > > This patch is essentially a global > > 'sed -i "s/__\(u*\)int\([0-9]*\)_t/\1int\2_t/"'. The only other changes > > are whitespace changes and removing the now unecessary type definitions. > > > > Running 'sed "s/^.//"' on the patch might be useful for checking that > > I didn't mess up the indentation. > > If everyone is fine using (u)int*_t over s*/u* this looks good. I'd > have a slight preference for s*/u* as in the rest of the kernel, but > either way getting rid of our crazy __ types is a good thing. Don't really care that much. I'd prefer (marginally) to go with the (u)int*_t types as userspace then doesn't need a set of typedefs in the platform headers to support the kernel specific types in libxfs code.... Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@fromorbit.com _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs