Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Sun, 24 Feb 2019 21:07:12 +0530
From:   Bharath Vedartham <linux.bhar@gmail.com>
To:     Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
Cc:     linux-block@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] badblocks: Prefer unsigned int over unsigned
Message-ID: <20190224153712.GA11981@bharath12345-Inspiron-5559>
References: <20190224141952.GA3653@bharath12345-Inspiron-5559>
 <b96f9ac8-639c-adfa-e0a4-5ff537bc9db4@kernel.dk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <b96f9ac8-639c-adfa-e0a4-5ff537bc9db4@kernel.dk>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Sun, Feb 24, 2019 at 08:15:30AM -0700, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On 2/24/19 7:19 AM, Bharath Vedartham wrote:
> > Replace unsigned with unsigned int to improve readability.
> 
> Frivolous change, would make a lot more sense to get checkpatch
> to stop complaining about this.
> 
> -- 
> Jens Axboe
>
I understand. I am starting out kernel hacking. I have been working on
fixing checkpatch.pl warnings. If you have any tasks for me in the
kernel, it would be great.

I have also noticed a lot of warnings to replace printk with subsystem
specific warning functions. Is that a valuable change?

Bharath