Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner+w=401wt.eu-S1757822AbYHIFcX@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1757822AbYHIFcX (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Sat, 9 Aug 2008 01:32:23 -0400
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751000AbYHIFcP
	(ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel-outgoing>);
	Sat, 9 Aug 2008 01:32:15 -0400
Received: from smtpq2.tilbu1.nb.home.nl ([213.51.146.201]:60215 "EHLO
	smtpq2.tilbu1.nb.home.nl" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1750970AbYHIFcP (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Sat, 9 Aug 2008 01:32:15 -0400
Message-ID: <489D2BE9.4070206@keyaccess.nl>
Date: Sat, 09 Aug 2008 07:32:25 +0200
From: Rene Herman <rene.herman@keyaccess.nl>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.16 (X11/20080707)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
CC: Bjorn Helgaas <bjorn.helgaas@hp.com>,
       Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
       Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] PNP: make the resource type an unsigned long
References: <489BEA31.3040101@keyaccess.nl> <489CC0DD.5010402@zytor.com> <489D2954.9090309@keyaccess.nl> <489D2A2F.7060206@zytor.com>
In-Reply-To: <489D2A2F.7060206@zytor.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1203
Lines: 31

On 09-08-08 07:25, H. Peter Anvin wrote:

>>> Seems a bit pointless ... either one of those flags is >= 32 bits, in 
>>> which case we need u64, or it's not, in which case there is no reason 
>>> to burden the output with bits we don't need.
>>
>> Yes, it's a not a functional patch -- only a type-consistency one. 
>> Right now we're mixing ints (signed ones even) and unsigned longs and 
>> while in this case that's not a functional problem it's messy and 
>> inconsistent.
>>
>> I agree (as Andrew said earlier as well) that the struct resource 
>> flags member should probably just be a u32 but it's not. Changing that 
>> would be a bigger change than just a simple conistency thing.
>>
> 
> You're going in the wrong direction for consistency.  long is different 
> on 32 and 64 bits, and really should be avoided unless that is intended.

I know and fair enough but changing struct resource is just a bit too 
central for my tastes.

<shrug>

Rene.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/