From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 40EF0C04AA5 for ; Thu, 25 Aug 2022 00:53:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S231455AbiHYAxA (ORCPT ); Wed, 24 Aug 2022 20:53:00 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:51932 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S231448AbiHYAwz (ORCPT ); Wed, 24 Aug 2022 20:52:55 -0400 Received: from mail-ej1-x62d.google.com (mail-ej1-x62d.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::62d]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C189A8E4EB for ; Wed, 24 Aug 2022 17:52:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ej1-x62d.google.com with SMTP id j21so31227691ejs.0 for ; Wed, 24 Aug 2022 17:52:53 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linux-foundation.org; s=google; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc; bh=ot0aEvyT380VjDU6PPl13tz+5G5649T71Q1QmyiGXIo=; b=YpSDVkBcxWVnnXfQXF/M7AZGWY5x+V+c24wMO5zVR8RFtXivElwnk0FLNTXke/emLT oh8/MGX4jyRJc+YrZXh96+Jtsdh8UfgCE6n4YSYTOMmu4AtkTQJ7laVjSVHJm8+QclNG oVzUJs4I5lvMg1LyJ9KO0CmiPyQ9FIcsSPJtg= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc; bh=ot0aEvyT380VjDU6PPl13tz+5G5649T71Q1QmyiGXIo=; b=f+oJ0EB25r/KGWr/6lOZz4X8yhzjHfEffTWkO1rEOMm9iaZz61GsBPTw857O40KokW eoRsNPZcEjtiR5rIZntqRZcFjEp27Hm+1V2KOf047QJQh2ordfc3XnWFcz7vgkl8+iB5 eZQDCil++u8Vj/VLt/R1L2213hEyGIyDeM8hj5fWizPyNCpo2KnjKw24uUrm7o7L5ern +uyuA23tn65LC9DYWjAJzHpbPUrdSLuIx0cRAzP8LLFcvPSD1jtn71EGQ0K72Wv9FdUV DzCj/F7jLjyokX1h0PuqTmLZ7vub6CYqVnGdXuvwLDcg2CUs3h3bB1LuQ7LF4IRsYqx3 wQyg== X-Gm-Message-State: ACgBeo0vMzPXrjZRjZ2r9cSPyTLLrGAYLzzS3JNPxaBcvkckq5+x6F87 wQBW6duOODAqhODLua8plLwKhKo4NrpvBFHQPcY= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AA6agR6+ihwAxvFG3IZSSv0OilELyVnja20t9OdLHZTF6IA+p0gkVfrahgjLea0uAM7Sx4yfcj8S9A== X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:98d5:b0:73d:538a:cb88 with SMTP id zd21-20020a17090698d500b0073d538acb88mr904358ejb.422.1661388771424; Wed, 24 Aug 2022 17:52:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-wr1-f43.google.com (mail-wr1-f43.google.com. [209.85.221.43]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id n26-20020a5099da000000b0043bbf79b3ebsm4000419edb.54.2022.08.24.17.52.38 for (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 24 Aug 2022 17:52:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-wr1-f43.google.com with SMTP id z16so3891890wrh.10 for ; Wed, 24 Aug 2022 17:52:38 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 2002:adf:e843:0:b0:225:221f:262 with SMTP id d3-20020adfe843000000b00225221f0262mr764111wrn.193.1661388757863; Wed, 24 Aug 2022 17:52:37 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20210423230609.13519-1-alx.manpages@gmail.com> <20220824185505.56382-1-alx.manpages@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: From: Linus Torvalds Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2022 17:52:21 -0700 X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] Many pages: Document fixed-width types with ISO C naming To: Alejandro Colomar Cc: Alexei Starovoitov , Alex Colomar , Alexei Starovoitov , linux-man , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Daniel Borkmann , Zack Weinberg , LKML , glibc , GCC , bpf , LTP List , Linux API , linux-arch , David Laight , Joseph Myers , Florian Weimer , Cyril Hrubis , David Howells , Arnd Bergmann , Rich Felker , Adhemerval Zanella , Michael Kerrisk Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Aug 24, 2022 at 4:36 PM Alejandro Colomar wrote: > > I'm trying to be nice, and ask for review to make sure I'm not making > some big mistake by accident, and I get disrespect? No thanks. You've been told multiple times that the kernel doesn't use the "standard" names, and *cannot* use them for namespace reasons, and you ignore all the feedback, and then you claim you are asking for review? That's not "asking for review". That's "I think I know the answer, and when people tell me otherwise I ignore them". The fact is, kernel UAPI header files MUST NOT use the so-called standard names. We cannot provide said names, because they are only provided by the standard header files. And since kernel header files cannot provide them, then kernel UAPI header files cannot _use_ them. End result: any kernel UAPI header file will continue to use __u32 etc naming that doesn't have any namespace pollution issues. Nothing else is even remotely acceptable. Stop trying to make this something other than it is. And if you cannot accept these simple technical reasons, why do you expect respect? Why are you so special that you think you can change the rules for kernel uapi files over the *repeated* objections from maintainers who know better? Linus From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from picard.linux.it (picard.linux.it [213.254.12.146]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8E468C3F6B0 for ; Thu, 25 Aug 2022 00:53:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: from picard.linux.it (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by picard.linux.it (Postfix) with ESMTP id E348D3CA409 for ; Thu, 25 Aug 2022 02:53:03 +0200 (CEST) Received: from in-2.smtp.seeweb.it (in-2.smtp.seeweb.it [IPv6:2001:4b78:1:20::2]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-384)) (No client certificate requested) by picard.linux.it (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5D3303C941D for ; Thu, 25 Aug 2022 02:52:53 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mail-ed1-x534.google.com (mail-ed1-x534.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::534]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by in-2.smtp.seeweb.it (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7357260122A for ; Thu, 25 Aug 2022 02:52:52 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-ed1-x534.google.com with SMTP id z8so3531517edb.0 for ; Wed, 24 Aug 2022 17:52:52 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linux-foundation.org; s=google; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc; bh=ot0aEvyT380VjDU6PPl13tz+5G5649T71Q1QmyiGXIo=; b=YpSDVkBcxWVnnXfQXF/M7AZGWY5x+V+c24wMO5zVR8RFtXivElwnk0FLNTXke/emLT oh8/MGX4jyRJc+YrZXh96+Jtsdh8UfgCE6n4YSYTOMmu4AtkTQJ7laVjSVHJm8+QclNG oVzUJs4I5lvMg1LyJ9KO0CmiPyQ9FIcsSPJtg= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc; bh=ot0aEvyT380VjDU6PPl13tz+5G5649T71Q1QmyiGXIo=; b=45gbI8yzvp+ERatTr8u2XKlHvNQPm90o8vZr7hAlfjjIcDc6yvQLy4ohAFJ3HjJAAQ b/wbJaBAxIKfaYllGYhe6PxsYtEghjCuHnL28qb7DpiIbxlVCB0nsbVKRLSlTaU4FhSB rM9p1IVk9aKATWClrB7ifksjqJYeYbG8smWa2GUSxZlQ1qbGXPXUWJS2aQjSMXOpac2B mKodCB0ViHWjnTA7PzFe5Co80LP1zz75Z8EyaBMqxkSoL/kByQsT/bKFBTrSpJjavhNU uJqQTwQcQiBqAdIhoEsQVt4Is6+BCYROyeEt1uvORgN4qepUAth0kL7Fsr/4za/qZEAJ WBWQ== X-Gm-Message-State: ACgBeo1E15WQqcaIg9eQnp7jPGH9cyJX3uoO2YIwI8PfofpZyqhsnOm0 s+ALxMKwFQ/svW8Jfb+XLWLR0sD3JX61S64xdwc= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AA6agR41MaZsyGcRAtjVAlwrgr3FWrafwz08RXRMg5xe0vzSSPvLnp23SJC8qswT1JNmocufsKBCUw== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6402:248d:b0:437:dd4c:e70e with SMTP id q13-20020a056402248d00b00437dd4ce70emr1171999eda.75.1661388771720; Wed, 24 Aug 2022 17:52:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-wr1-f44.google.com (mail-wr1-f44.google.com. [209.85.221.44]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id b2-20020a1709063ca200b006ff0b457cdasm1795919ejh.53.2022.08.24.17.52.38 for (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 24 Aug 2022 17:52:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-wr1-f44.google.com with SMTP id z16so3891891wrh.10 for ; Wed, 24 Aug 2022 17:52:38 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 2002:adf:e843:0:b0:225:221f:262 with SMTP id d3-20020adfe843000000b00225221f0262mr764111wrn.193.1661388757863; Wed, 24 Aug 2022 17:52:37 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20210423230609.13519-1-alx.manpages@gmail.com> <20220824185505.56382-1-alx.manpages@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: From: Linus Torvalds Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2022 17:52:21 -0700 X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: Message-ID: To: Alejandro Colomar X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.102.4 at in-2.smtp.seeweb.it X-Virus-Status: Clean Subject: Re: [LTP] [PATCH v3] Many pages: Document fixed-width types with ISO C naming X-BeenThere: ltp@lists.linux.it X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Linux Test Project List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: linux-man , Rich Felker , Alexei Starovoitov , David Howells , Alexei Starovoitov , Joseph Myers , linux-arch , Zack Weinberg , Daniel Borkmann , Alex Colomar , Michael Kerrisk , Arnd Bergmann , GCC , LTP List , glibc , Greg Kroah-Hartman , LKML , David Laight , Adhemerval Zanella , Linux API , bpf Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: ltp-bounces+ltp=archiver.kernel.org@lists.linux.it Sender: "ltp" On Wed, Aug 24, 2022 at 4:36 PM Alejandro Colomar wrote: > > I'm trying to be nice, and ask for review to make sure I'm not making > some big mistake by accident, and I get disrespect? No thanks. You've been told multiple times that the kernel doesn't use the "standard" names, and *cannot* use them for namespace reasons, and you ignore all the feedback, and then you claim you are asking for review? That's not "asking for review". That's "I think I know the answer, and when people tell me otherwise I ignore them". The fact is, kernel UAPI header files MUST NOT use the so-called standard names. We cannot provide said names, because they are only provided by the standard header files. And since kernel header files cannot provide them, then kernel UAPI header files cannot _use_ them. End result: any kernel UAPI header file will continue to use __u32 etc naming that doesn't have any namespace pollution issues. Nothing else is even remotely acceptable. Stop trying to make this something other than it is. And if you cannot accept these simple technical reasons, why do you expect respect? Why are you so special that you think you can change the rules for kernel uapi files over the *repeated* objections from maintainers who know better? Linus -- Mailing list info: https://lists.linux.it/listinfo/ltp