Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20210423230609.13519-1-alx.manpages@gmail.com>
 <20220824185505.56382-1-alx.manpages@gmail.com> <CAADnVQKiEVL9zRtN4WY2+cTD2b3b3buV8BQb83yQw13pWq4OGQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <c06008bc-0c13-12f1-df85-3814b74e47f9@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <c06008bc-0c13-12f1-df85-3814b74e47f9@gmail.com>
From:   Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Date:   Wed, 24 Aug 2022 17:52:21 -0700
Message-ID: <CAHk-=whfft=qpCiQ=mkaCz+X1MEfGK5hpUWYoM5zWK=2EQMwyw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] Many pages: Document fixed-width types with ISO C naming
To:     Alejandro Colomar <alx.manpages@gmail.com>
Cc:     Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com>,
        Alex Colomar <alx@kernel.org>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
        linux-man <linux-man@vger.kernel.org>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
        Zack Weinberg <zackw@panix.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        glibc <libc-alpha@sourceware.org>, GCC <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>,
        bpf <bpf@vger.kernel.org>, LTP List <ltp@lists.linux.it>,
        Linux API <linux-api@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-arch <linux-arch@vger.kernel.org>,
        David Laight <David.Laight@aculab.com>,
        Joseph Myers <joseph@codesourcery.com>,
        Florian Weimer <fweimer@redhat.com>,
        Cyril Hrubis <chrubis@suse.cz>,
        David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>, Rich Felker <dalias@libc.org>,
        Adhemerval Zanella <adhemerval.zanella@linaro.org>,
        Michael Kerrisk <mtk.manpages@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, Aug 24, 2022 at 4:36 PM Alejandro Colomar
<alx.manpages@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I'm trying to be nice, and ask for review to make sure I'm not making
> some big mistake by accident, and I get disrespect?  No thanks.

You've been told multiple times that the kernel doesn't use the
"standard" names, and *cannot* use them for namespace reasons, and you
ignore all the feedback, and then you claim you are asking for review?

That's not "asking for review". That's "I think I know the answer, and
when people tell me otherwise I ignore them".

The fact is, kernel UAPI header files MUST NOT use the so-called standard names.

We cannot provide said names, because they are only provided by the
standard header files.

And since kernel header files cannot provide them, then kernel UAPI
header files cannot _use_ them.

End result: any kernel UAPI header file will continue to use __u32 etc
naming that doesn't have any namespace pollution issues.

Nothing else is even remotely acceptable.

Stop trying to make this something other than it is.

And if you cannot accept these simple technical reasons, why do you
expect respect?

Why are you so special that you think you can change the rules for
kernel uapi files over the *repeated* objections from maintainers who
know better?

                  Linus