On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 5:45 PM, Al Viro <viro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Incidentally, why the hell do we have
> typedef __kernel_nlink_t nlink_t;
> anyway? It's *not* exposed to userland and it's different from the
> userland nlink_t (which is unsigned int on 32bit and unsigned long on 64bit).
> Why not use __kernel_nlink_t (or explicitly-sized __uNN) in
> arch/*/include/asm/stat.h and declare nlink_t kernel-side as __u32?
Probably hysterical raisins, and just converted to the whole
__kernel_nlink_t form together with other, more relevant things.
Feel free to remove it.
> Why do we have daddr_t, while we are at it? There is exactly one user -
> fs/freevxfs and there we definitely want a fixed-sized type.
I think it's something that probably came from freevxfs and BSD roots
or similar. It's a BSD'ism, afaik.
Linus
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
