From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1032555AbeBOCN1 (ORCPT ); Wed, 14 Feb 2018 21:13:27 -0500 Received: from zeniv.linux.org.uk ([195.92.253.2]:40618 "EHLO ZenIV.linux.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1032454AbeBOCN0 (ORCPT ); Wed, 14 Feb 2018 21:13:26 -0500 Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2018 02:13:21 +0000 From: Al Viro To: John Pittman Cc: axboe@kernel.dk, linux-block@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] block: Change 'unsigned' to 'unsigned int' throughout block layer Message-ID: <20180215021321.GB30522@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> References: <1518658622-5931-1-git-send-email-jpittman@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1518658622-5931-1-git-send-email-jpittman@redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.1 (2017-09-22) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 08:37:02PM -0500, John Pittman wrote: > In quite a few files throughout the block layer, the bare 'unsigned' is > used rather than the preferred 'unsigned int'. Preferred by whom? > The issue was What is that "issue" and why is it a problem in the first place? > exposed by checkpatch.pl. Warnings encountered were: Oh, good - so presumably it does have some explanations beyond "The Most Holy checkpatch.pl Spake Unto Us"; could the esteemed sir share those with us?