Fair enough. Al Viro <viro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 09:05:30PM -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote: >> >... as long as we do not have typedef __kernel_foo_t foo_t in >linux/types.h. >> > >> >> In the case of things like nlink_t and dev_t I would suggest we >> explicitly call out the types as kernel and user. I would suggest >> knlink_t and unlink_t but the latter made me want to stab my eyes >> out due to its confusion potential, so I wonder if we should >> establish a new convention with _kt (kernel type) and _ut (user >> type) suffixes, so nlink_kt and nlink_ut, alternatively one could >> consider k_nlink_t and u_nlink_t. > >What the hell for? _Which_ userland nlink_t, anyway? We have quite a >few >struct stat variants in there. Sorry, but I really don't see any point >in that, and a lot of potential for confusion. Marshalling is about >the >only thing we need the userland ones for and the code doing it is just >fine >with the only object of that type in sight being the field of e.g. >struct stat >with given name... -- Sent from my mobile phone. Please excuse brevity and lack of formatting. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arch" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
