From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Fri, 17 Jan 2003 21:44:08 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Fri, 17 Jan 2003 21:44:07 -0500 Received: from mta7.srv.hcvlny.cv.net ([167.206.5.22]:8548 "EHLO mta7.srv.hcvlny.cv.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Fri, 17 Jan 2003 21:44:06 -0500 Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 21:49:16 -0500 From: Rob Wilkens Subject: [PATCH] Trivial Comment Change (Please Verify) (2.5.59) To: Linux Kernel Mailing List Reply-to: robw@optonline.net Message-id: <1042858155.3800.16.camel@RobsPC.RobertWilkens.com> Organization: Robert Wilkens MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.2.1 Content-type: text/plain Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Please remember that I'm a newbie. As such, even though I'm only changing a comment, an expert should review the change before it goes through. I was looking up the definition of kdev_t, and I saw it defined two entirely different ways (only once for compilation purposes, so no compile time problems). In the same file, , patched below and I only patched the comments and did not touch the code, it was defined as (in the comments): (1) typedef struct { unsigned short major, minor; } kdev_t; Which would be a long (two shorts), then actually defined later in the code as: (2) typedef struct { unsigned short value; } kdev_t; As you can guess, Redefining the comment to be two "chars" instead of two shorts keeps the meaningful description in the comments (there is a major # component and a minor # component), but redefining them to be chars (bytes) rather than shorts reflects more accurately the storage space allotted by the actual structure (one short, not two). I figure it's best, when possible, to have the comments match up with reality. If someone (like myself just now) is referencing the comments for guidance with respect to what the data structures look like, they would have soon discoverred that the data structures looked nothing like what the comment was describing. I'd appreciate if someone could get this or a similar patch in, and no, I don't need to be specially credited for making a comment change :-). Patch follows. --- kdev_t.h.orig 2003-01-17 21:25:18.000000000 -0500 +++ kdev_t.h 2003-01-17 21:33:57.000000000 -0500 @@ -31,7 +31,7 @@ However, for the time being we let kdev_t be almost the same as dev_t: -typedef struct { unsigned short major, minor; } kdev_t; +typedef struct { unsigned char major, minor; } kdev_t; Admissible operations on an object of type kdev_t: - passing it along