From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from ipmail04.adl6.internode.on.net ([150.101.137.141]:35422 "EHLO ipmail04.adl6.internode.on.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S968937AbdDTAJ2 (ORCPT ); Wed, 19 Apr 2017 20:09:28 -0400 Date: Thu, 20 Apr 2017 10:09:09 +1000 From: Dave Chinner Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] mkfs: unify numeric types of main variables in main() Message-ID: <20170420000909.GI12369@dastard> References: <20170419153025.10368-1-jtulak@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20170419153025.10368-1-jtulak@redhat.com> Sender: linux-xfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: List-Id: xfs To: Jan Tulak Cc: linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 05:30:24PM +0200, Jan Tulak wrote: > Followup of my "[xfsprogs] Do we need so many data types for user input?" email. > This version has bool for flags and uses PRIu64 for printing 64bit values. > > Other issues from RFC, that I didn't get a satisfactory feedback to: > * __uint64_t is used because it is declared in xfsprogs, so unless there is a > reason to not use it (e.g. the declared type is just for some special use, > or is obsolete), I'm sticking to it. uint64_t is a standard C99 type. Please use it over an internal type that we plan to get rid of. i.e. http://oss.sgi.com/archives/xfs/2016-01/msg00386.html These patches were never finalised/finished because of conflicts with all the COW work that was pending at the time. This type conversion still needs to be picked up and finished... Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@fromorbit.com