From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S267943AbUGaLCx (ORCPT ); Sat, 31 Jul 2004 07:02:53 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S267944AbUGaLCw (ORCPT ); Sat, 31 Jul 2004 07:02:52 -0400 Received: from holly.csn.ul.ie ([136.201.105.4]:58269 "EHLO holly.csn.ul.ie") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S267943AbUGaLCv (ORCPT ); Sat, 31 Jul 2004 07:02:51 -0400 Date: Sat, 31 Jul 2004 12:02:25 +0100 (IST) From: Dave Airlie X-X-Sender: airlied@skynet To: Eric Anholt Cc: arjanv@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, DRI Subject: Re: drm - first steps towards 64-bit correctness.. In-Reply-To: <1091267836.425.46.camel@leguin> Message-ID: References: <1091266345.425.34.camel@leguin> <1091267687.2819.3.camel@laptop.fenrus.com> <1091267836.425.46.camel@leguin> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > > can you explain why u32 would be outlawed? Surely it's trivial to do a > > typedef for u32 on BSD for drm ?? > > If there are nice standard types (uint32_t or u_int32_t, can't remember > which at the moment, I mentioned it in an email some time ago) out there > already that linux has too, why not use those? > Lets get this bit of the discussion over with :-), the kernel has uint*_t in it in a few places, this is now a standard type so we will use it, if someone is going to work on the DRM they'll see the surrounding uint32_t so they'll know what it looks like and I'll make sure none of the others sneak in.... Dave. -- David Airlie, Software Engineer http://www.skynet.ie/~airlied / airlied at skynet.ie pam_smb / Linux DECstation / Linux VAX / ILUG person