On Thu, Jun 16, 2022 at 04:51:08PM +0200, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote:
> If that's a "dinosaur approach" that "has to stop", it'd certainly be
> news to me (and I'm guessing others on the list too). I've never really
> seen anybody question the kernel's `unsigned long` usage before.
>
> So hopefully some outcome of this discussion will make it clear, and
> then either this patch will go in, or I'll get to work on carefully
> adjusting my code that uses `unsigned long` at the moment.
Searching through list archives, there's not much, but I did find [1]
from Linus:
PPS. And btw, the warning is unacceptable too. Cast the thing to
"unsigned long" (or uintptr_t, but quite frankly, in the kernel I'd
suggest "unsigned long" rather than the more obscure standard types)
after you've fixed the macro argument problem.
[1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/AANLkTineDxntR0ZTXdgXrc6qx6pATTORgOwFR5+w5MLN@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx/
