Re: [CFT] more kdev_t-ectomy

From: H. Peter Anvin (hpa@zytor.com)
Date: Sun Apr 20 2003 - 16:10:36 EST


Followup to: <20030420160034.GA20123@win.tue.nl>
By author: Andries Brouwer <aebr@win.tue.nl>
In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel
>
> Of course it may be possible to avoid kernel-internal numbers altogether.
> Sometimes that is an improvement, sometimes not. Pointers are more
> complicated than numbers - they point at something that must be allocated
> and freed and reference counted. A number is like a pointer without the
> reference counting.
>

I guess the question is: is there any point to have three forms --
with necessary conversions between them -- or is it simpler to have
two forms and just use the more awkward dev_t form everywhere? The
only use for dev_t's in the kernel should be getting them from or
shipping them off to userspace at some point, so it might be just as
easily to do the conversion directly -- macroized, of course.

We do need a dev32_t for NFSv2 et al, though.

        -hpa

-- 
<hpa@transmeta.com> at work, <hpa@zytor.com> in private!
"Unix gives you enough rope to shoot yourself in the foot."
Architectures needed: ia64 m68k mips64 ppc ppc64 s390 s390x sh v850 x86-64
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Apr 23 2003 - 22:00:27 EST