From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S263691AbTDTUWj (ORCPT ); Sun, 20 Apr 2003 16:22:39 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S263692AbTDTUWj (ORCPT ); Sun, 20 Apr 2003 16:22:39 -0400 Received: from hera.cwi.nl ([192.16.191.8]:55244 "EHLO hera.cwi.nl") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S263691AbTDTUWj (ORCPT ); Sun, 20 Apr 2003 16:22:39 -0400 From: Andries.Brouwer@cwi.nl Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2003 22:34:38 +0200 (MEST) Message-Id: To: Andries.Brouwer@cwi.nl, hch@infradead.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] new system call mknod64 Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, torvalds@transmeta.com Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org From: Christoph Hellwig On Sun, Apr 20, 2003 at 08:39:32PM +0200, Andries.Brouwer@cwi.nl wrote: > Change the type of the mknod arg from dev_t to unsigned int. > Add (for i386) mknod64. Please make the argument for mknod/mknod64 __u32/__u64. And I don't think adding the syscall makes sense before the internal dev_t representation has changed. Yes, there is a dozen rather uninteresting patches that can be applied any moment. But a new system call is more important, so I show it in public at some earlier stage, so that Linus and others, like you, can comment. Yesterday or the day before Linus preferred __u32 etc for this loopinfo64 ioctl, so I did it that way. Here, since mknod is a traditional Unix system call, I am still inclined to prefer (unsigned) int above __u32. Of course it doesn't matter much. Andries