On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 2:43 AM, Alan Cox wrote: >> I understand that type widths change in a compat setting.  So what? >> Code in each environment is written to it's own namespace anyhow. > > So you ned up with a pile of extra crap in the kernel to handle 32bit > userspace on 64bit and the like. If instead the structs are carefully > laid out this doesn't occur. > >> Here's what *I* think *you* think about __u32 vs u32 vs uint32_t. >> Correct me if I'm totally off-base here: > > And the __aligned_ ones for things like u64 in ioctls and structs... > > It's also a style and consistency thing, its trivialto use the same style > as the rest of the kernel, it's trivial to tweak and it helps keep > coherency of style, even if you are sitting at the keyboard mumbling > "bunch of morons if you ask me" while doing it ;) I'm always mumbling and cursing at my desk :p I've already changed the series to not use C99 types. I understand the value in style consistency :) I'm still trying to understand if there is any actual technical merit to avoid standard types though, of which there doesn't seem to be any. Anyhow, I've attached a patch that fixes the style documentation.