* Stephen Rothwell <sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > u32? > > It would have to be __u32, but we already use int and unsigned int > extensively in the siginfo structure (which are both always assumed to > be 32 bits). So "unsigned int" probably makes most sense. No. This whole mishap is an object lesson in why it's a bad idea to ever use ABI types outside of the __[us][8|16|32|64] space: some of them are 'fine', some of them (like longs) are not. And we have to start somewhere, so we might as well start with new code that adds new ABI details: if a patch only uses __[us][8|16|32|64] types then it's easier to tell whether it's a safe ABI extension. Thanks, Ingo -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-next" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
