Re: preempt-count oddities - still looking for comments :)
From: Robert Love
Date: Tue Apr 26 2005 - 15:32:38 EST
On Tue, 2005-04-26 at 22:05 +0200, Jesper Juhl wrote:
> Hmm, one downside to using "s32" instead of plain "int" is that not all
> thread_info.h files get asm/types.h pulled in and then won't have that
> type defined (m68knommu is one such as far as I can see). Would this make
> "int" prefered after all or should I just include asm/types.h where needed
> or just include it everywhere? seems logical that the file that uses
> header includes it directly instead of it getting included implicitly by
> other headers (like i386 where thread_info.h includes asm/page.h that then
> includes asm/mmx.h that then includes linux/types.h that finally includes
> Personally I'd just add the asm/types.h include to all the thread_info.h
> files (or go back to using int) - what's your preference?
Well, guess it depends how much we like s32 over int. Both are
identical on all supported architectures, so it is just a style issue,
If m68knommu is the only arch needing asm/typed.h included, I'd so just
include it. If more and more arches need it, just go with int.
It is probably an easier sell.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/