public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Sam Ravnborg <sam@ravnborg.org>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Cc: 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 18:28:37 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090121172837.GA4386@uranus.ravnborg.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200901211313.17394.arnd@arndb.de>

On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 01:13:16PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Wednesday 21 January 2009, Sam Ravnborg wrote:
> > Could we add a new symbol for this?
> > We know we are going to use this in several places so a simpler variant
> > would be more readable.
> > 
> > Something like:
> > 
> > #ifdef __64BIT
> > ...
> > #endif
> > 
> > When we define __64BIT we would use the  __BITS_PER_LONG == 64 check.
> 
> 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.

It gives the warning only if you add -Wundef which IIRC is not default
with -Wall. And using the "__BITS_PER_LONG == 64" the risk of gitting
the expression wrong is much higher than the simpler variant where
you only write:

    __64BIT

But I have no strong feelings for it.

	Sam

  parent reply	other threads:[~2009-01-21 17:27 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 23+ 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 14:29               ` Kyle McMartin
2009-01-21 16:44               ` H. Peter Anvin
2009-01-21 17:28               ` Sam Ravnborg [this message]
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=20090121172837.GA4386@uranus.ravnborg.org \
    --to=sam@ravnborg.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=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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox