On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 2:09 AM, Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 05:30:24PM +0200, Jan Tulak wrote: >> Followup of my "[xfsprogs] Do we need so many data types for user input?" email. >> This version has bool for flags and uses PRIu64 for printing 64bit values. >> >> Other issues from RFC, that I didn't get a satisfactory feedback to: >> * __uint64_t is used because it is declared in xfsprogs, so unless there is a >> reason to not use it (e.g. the declared type is just for some special use, >> or is obsolete), I'm sticking to it. > > uint64_t is a standard C99 type. Please use it over an internal > type that we plan to get rid of. i.e. > > http://oss.sgi.com/archives/xfs/2016-01/msg00386.html > > These patches were never finalised/finished because of conflicts > with all the COW work that was pending at the time. This type > conversion still needs to be picked up and finished... > Thanks, Dave. I will turn it to the standard type. Jan > Cheers, > > Dave. > -- > Dave Chinner > david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx -- Jan Tulak jtulak@xxxxxxxxxx / jan@xxxxxxxx -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-xfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
