On 2018/11/16 17:19, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Thu, Nov 15, 2018 at 02:18:47PM -0800, Omar Sandoval wrote: >> My only reason to prefer unsigned int is consistency. unsigned int is >> much more common in the kernel: >> >> $ ag --cc -s 'unsigned\s+int' | wc -l >> 129632 >> $ ag --cc -s 'unsigned\s+(?!char|short|int|long)' | wc -l >> 22435 >> >> checkpatch also warns on plain unsigned. > > Talk about chicken and egg. unsigned is perfectly valid C, and being > shorter often helps being more readable. checkpath is as so often > wrongly opinionated.. > sigh...I personally tend to use "unsigned" instead of "unsigned int" as well, but checkpatch.pl also suggests erofs to use "unsigned int" :-( Thanks, Gao Xiang
