Re: kernel header separation

[David Woodhouse]

On Sat, 2003-09-06 at 00:22 +0100, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 05, 2003 at 03:16:04PM -0600, Erik Andersen wrote:
> > On Fri Sep 05, 2003 at 03:41:54PM +0100, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > > i think all these _t types are ugly ;-(
> > 
> > They may be ugly, but they are standardized and have very 
> > precise meanings defined by ISO C99, which is a very good
> > thing for code interoperability...
> 
> __u8 has a very precise meaning defined by Linux.  If you're including
> a Linux header. that's what you need to worry about.

It's a kernel-private type. If we're aiming for a clean set of headers,
then ideally we should avoid gratuitously defining our own types when
standards already exist.

-- 
dwmw2

-
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/