On 12/09/2013 01:35 AM, Qais Yousef wrote:
-----Original Message-----
From: David Daney [mailto:ddaney.cavm@xxxxxxxxx]
Sent: 06 December 2013 16:48
To: Qais Yousef
Cc: linux-mips@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mips/include/asm/mipsregs.h: s/u16/unsigned short/
On 12/06/2013 08:35 AM, Qais Yousef wrote:
-----Original Message-----
From: David Daney [mailto:ddaney.cavm@xxxxxxxxx]
Sent: 06 December 2013 16:32
To: Qais Yousef
Cc: linux-mips@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mips/include/asm/mipsregs.h: s/u16/unsigned
short/
On 12/06/2013 01:20 AM, Qais Yousef wrote:
I was getting this error when including this header in my driver:
arch/mips/include/asm/mipsregs.h:644:33: error: unknown type name
‘u16’
since the use of u16 is not really necessary, convert it to unsigned short.
Signed-off-by: Qais Yousef <qais.yousef@xxxxxxxxxx>
Reviewed-by: Steven J. Hill <Steven.Hill@xxxxxxxxxx>
NAK.
Just #include <linux/types.h> at the top of asm/mipsregs.h instead.
Funnily that was my first solution before I changed it to this :)
I'll resend but can you please give some explanation why changing u16 to
unsigned short is bad?
This is the linux kernel. People expect to see fixed width integer type definitions
using the conventional u8, u16, u32, etc.
If you are doing something tricky enough that you need to explicitly use a type of
a given width, don't hide the fact, bring it to our attention by using the kernel
standard type.
If you don't need exactly a u16, just make it an unsigned int and be done with it.
It would appear that micro-MIPS instructions are 16 bit, so use u16 everywhere
for them.
OK thanks for the explanation. u16 is more safe and future proof for sure.
Also it looks like this function really should be declared as returning type bool, not
int. For the same reason: It cannot return any integer, only truth values. Don't
hide this fact. Bring it to our attention by using the proper types.
I share this view about Booleans to be honest
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/1554183/match=bool
If you are storing Boolean values in an array, Linus has a point. For
function return values, he doesn't convince me.
David Daney
v2 is on the way.
Thanks,
Qais
David Daney
Thanks,
Qais
David Daney
---
arch/mips/include/asm/mipsregs.h | 4 ++--
1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/mips/include/asm/mipsregs.h
b/arch/mips/include/asm/mipsregs.h
index e033141..0a2d6ef 100644
--- a/arch/mips/include/asm/mipsregs.h
+++ b/arch/mips/include/asm/mipsregs.h
@@ -641,9 +641,9 @@
* microMIPS instructions can be 16-bit or 32-bit in length. This
* returns a 1 if the instruction is 16-bit and a 0 if 32-bit.
*/
-static inline int mm_insn_16bit(u16 insn)
+static inline int mm_insn_16bit(unsigned short insn)
{
- u16 opcode = (insn >> 10) & 0x7;
+ unsigned short opcode = (insn >> 10) & 0x7;
return (opcode >= 1 && opcode <= 3) ? 1 : 0;
}
