Re: [PATCH 4/4] CPER: Remove unnecessary use of user-space types

[Greg Kroah-Hartman]

On Mon, Mar 25, 2019 at 01:26:08PM -0500, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 25, 2019 at 01:14:25PM -0500, helgaas@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> > From: Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > 
> > "__u32" and similar types are intended for things exported to user-space,
> > including structs used in ioctls; see include/uapi/asm-generic/int-l64.h.
> > 
> > They are not needed for the CPER struct definitions, which not exported to
> > user-space and not used in ioctls.  Replace them with the typical "u32" and
> > similar types.  No functional change intended.
> > 
> > The reason for changing this is to remove the question of "why do we use
> > __u32 here instead of u32?"  We should use __u32 when there's a reason for
> > it; otherwise, we should prefer u32 for consistency.
> > 
> > Reference: Documentation/process/coding-style.rst
> > Signed-off-by: Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > CC: Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > CC: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > CC: Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> 
> I cc'd you folks because you were part of this conversation:
> 
>   https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/1526350925-14922-3-git-send-email-yamada.masahiro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx/T/#u
> 
> I *think* the conclusion there was that this sort of change makes
> sense, but I want to make sure.  If it does make sense, I'm surprised
> at how much stuff in include/linux/ still uses __u32 when it doesn't
> appear to need it.

People just cut/paste and don't think about it.  We used to have a bunch
of known structures that didn't use __u32 and friends as people didn't
realize it, so it doesn't surprise me that the other way is also the
case :(

greg k-h