From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1750949AbYAUMjC (ORCPT ); Mon, 21 Jan 2008 07:39:02 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751216AbYAUMiy (ORCPT ); Mon, 21 Jan 2008 07:38:54 -0500 Received: from wa-out-1112.google.com ([209.85.146.177]:54804 "EHLO wa-out-1112.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751043AbYAUMix (ORCPT ); Mon, 21 Jan 2008 07:38:53 -0500 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject:references:in-reply-to:x-enigmail-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=lm6mFidTC3OKACavSVJEh6v33t1BUznfmm8DePysf5hrqMDLQjBMQjF+2wXMTcCfH6g/BvFghW6JJLlVF02TnX7La09IXhz1eNVbx2n6sb2iSRw8t1nRJ2viKsuT9QZq0yuH5dSCO6blq7DSBMin84XxupaiVi9thwayh4XLKvA= Message-ID: <47949257.1000102@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2008 21:38:47 +0900 From: Tejun Heo User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (X11/20070801) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Rusty Russell CC: Linus Torvalds , Andrew Morton , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Jeff Garzik Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/6] RFC: Typesafe callbacks References: <200801202046.14746.rusty@rustcorp.com.au> <47934604.6080505@gmail.com> <200801210917.30977.rusty@rustcorp.com.au> <200801212233.04989.rusty@rustcorp.com.au> In-Reply-To: <200801212233.04989.rusty@rustcorp.com.au> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.5 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Rusty Russell wrote: > On Monday 21 January 2008 09:17:30 Rusty Russell wrote: >> On Monday 21 January 2008 00:00:52 Tejun Heo wrote: >>> What should be do are >>> >>> * Check that the threadfn's argument fits into void *. >> For everything but timer, you'll get a warning if the data isn't assignable >> to a void *, so you get a warning if you use a non-pointer already. >> >> But it would be cool to allow functions which take an unsigned long. > ... >> I'll test this out and see what I can make... > > I think this comes under "too ugly", but here's an attempt. Maybe we should be content with pointer type checking. It seems like it's going too far and after all the clutter it's not possible to use int as argument. :-( Thanks. -- tejun