On Sun, Jul 28, 2002 at 05:45:37PM +1000, Brad Hards wrote:
> On Tue, 23 Jul 2002 02:04, Vojtech Pavlik wrote:
> > On Sun, Jul 21, 2002 at 08:50:56PM +1000, Brad Hards wrote:
> > > G'day,
> > >
> > > The attached patch basically implements:
> > > +struct input_devinfo {
> > > + uint16_t bustype;
> > > + uint16_t vendor;
> > > + uint16_t product;
> > > + uint16_t version;
> > > +};
> > > +
> > >
> > > -#define EVIOCGID _IOR('E', 0x02, short[4])
> > > /* get device ID */ +#define EVIOCGID _IOR('E', 0x02,
> > > struct input_devinfo) /* get device ID */
> > >
> > > It affects just about every input driver, as a result of some associated
> > > cleanups that I applied, and its about 40K uncompressed - hence the gzip.
> > >
> > > Is there anything that would stop this being applied?
> >
> > No, the patch is OK.
> I am not happy about the change from uint16_t to __u16, which you appear
> to have made before sending this to Linus.
>
> That is a broken change - there is a standard type, and you've changed
> it to a non-standard type. This is confusing to userspace programmers, and
> I cannot provide a satisfactory explaination for this in documentation.
>
> Please change it back.
Well, I know this has been discussed back and forth.
__u16 is a kernel type and is defined if you #include <linux/input.h>.
uint16_t isn't.
__u* is used extensively in the input API anyway, so you'd have to
explain it to userspace programmers nevertheless. So I prefer keeping
the input.h include use just one type of explicit sized types.
Sure, we can change them all to uint*_t, but then do it all at once and
provide a satisfactory explanation for it. ;)
--
Vojtech Pavlik
SuSE Labs
On Sun, 28 Jul 2002 18:22, Vojtech Pavlik wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 28, 2002 at 05:45:37PM +1000, Brad Hards wrote:
<snip>
> > I am not happy about the change from uint16_t to __u16, which you appear
> > to have made before sending this to Linus.
> >
> > That is a broken change - there is a standard type, and you've changed
> > it to a non-standard type. This is confusing to userspace programmers,
> > and I cannot provide a satisfactory explaination for this in
> > documentation.
> >
> > Please change it back.
>
> Well, I know this has been discussed back and forth.
And I was right last time too :-)
> __u16 is a kernel type and is defined if you #include <linux/input.h>.
> uint16_t isn't.
__u16 is no more a kernel type than uint16_t.
It is a one line fix: include <linux/types.h> instead of <asm/types.h>
Which you probably should be doing anyway, since there is no
reason to rely on any assembler types in <linux/input.h>
> __u* is used extensively in the input API anyway, so you'd have to
> explain it to userspace programmers nevertheless. So I prefer keeping
> the input.h include use just one type of explicit sized types.
So do I, and it had better be a standard type.
Note that the input API does *NOT* use __u* extensively. In fact
if you take out the force feedback stuff (which Johannes already
agreed to change:), this is the *only* _u* usage in any part of the
input API.
> Sure, we can change them all to uint*_t, but then do it all at once and
> provide a satisfactory explanation for it. ;)
I am doing it all. Johannes agreed to the change, and I did the only
other required entry. If Johannes agrees, I'll do the trivial changes
for force-feedback.
The reason why I am not doing it all at once is to provide patches
that do one API change at a time. Or, depending on how you look
at it, I did the only change all-at-once, and you reverted it :)
Brad
--
http://conf.linux.org.au. 22-25Jan2003. Perth, Australia. Birds in Black.
On Sun, Jul 28, 2002 at 06:42:18PM +1000, Brad Hards wrote:
> > > I am not happy about the change from uint16_t to __u16, which you appear
> > > to have made before sending this to Linus.
> > >
> > > That is a broken change - there is a standard type, and you've changed
> > > it to a non-standard type. This is confusing to userspace programmers,
> > > and I cannot provide a satisfactory explaination for this in
> > > documentation.
> > >
> > > Please change it back.
> >
> > Well, I know this has been discussed back and forth.
> And I was right last time too :-)
>
> > __u16 is a kernel type and is defined if you #include <linux/input.h>.
> > uint16_t isn't.
> __u16 is no more a kernel type than uint16_t.
> It is a one line fix: include <linux/types.h> instead of <asm/types.h>
> Which you probably should be doing anyway, since there is no
> reason to rely on any assembler types in <linux/input.h>
>
> > __u* is used extensively in the input API anyway, so you'd have to
> > explain it to userspace programmers nevertheless. So I prefer keeping
> > the input.h include use just one type of explicit sized types.
> So do I, and it had better be a standard type.
>
> Note that the input API does *NOT* use __u* extensively. In fact
> if you take out the force feedback stuff (which Johannes already
> agreed to change:), this is the *only* _u* usage in any part of the
> input API.
>
> > Sure, we can change them all to uint*_t, but then do it all at once and
> > provide a satisfactory explanation for it. ;)
> I am doing it all. Johannes agreed to the change, and I did the only
> other required entry. If Johannes agrees, I'll do the trivial changes
> for force-feedback.
Please do then. Together with the change of <asm/types.h> to
<linux/types.h>. I hope it doesn't conflict if the user also #includes
"stdint.h" in the userspace program, though.
> The reason why I am not doing it all at once is to provide patches
> that do one API change at a time. Or, depending on how you look
> at it, I did the only change all-at-once, and you reverted it :)
--
Vojtech Pavlik
SuSE Labs