On Fri, Jul 4, 2014 at 4:27 PM, Laszlo Papp <[email protected]> wrote:

>
>
>
> On Fri, Jul 4, 2014 at 3:25 PM, Denys Vlasenko <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Jul 4, 2014 at 4:06 PM, Laszlo Papp <[email protected]> wrote:
>> > On Fri, Jul 4, 2014 at 2:47 PM, Denys Vlasenko <
>> [email protected]>
>> > wrote:
>> >>
>> >> On Fri, Jul 4, 2014 at 3:26 PM, Laszlo Papp <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >> >> > -# define FAT_IOCTL_GET_ATTRIBUTES        _IOR('r', 0x10, __u32)
>> >> >> > -# define FAT_IOCTL_SET_ATTRIBUTES        _IOW('r', 0x11, __u32)
>> >> >> > +# define FAT_IOCTL_GET_ATTRIBUTES        _IOR('r', 0x10,
>> uint32_t)
>> >> >> > +# define FAT_IOCTL_SET_ATTRIBUTES        _IOW('r', 0x11,
>> uint32_t)
>> >> >> >  #endif
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >  /* Currently supports only the FAT flags, not the NTFS ones.
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Applied, thanks!
>> >> >>
>> >> >> (why kernel doesn't just use std types?...)
>> >> >
>> >> > What do you mean by "std types"?
>> >>
>> >> Like uint32_t
>> >
>> >
>> > As indicated before, it was only introduced in C99. The kernel project
>> > predates that for one.
>>
>> I understand that.
>> It's 2014.
>> 15 years to convert to (now-)standard type should be doable.
>>
>
> How much have you developed the kernel, especially in the driver area?
>
> I can tell that the old golden rule applies here, especially for drivers:
> "Do not touch what is not broken.". It is hard to find people with the
> corresponding ICs to test such a minimal change unless the original author
> has free time for you to test it. Otherwise, you could potentially break a
> working driver.
>
> What is the benefit of the migration if you cannot test it and do not have
> time? Not much, really.
>
> Also, note that the kernel project is much bigger than busybox. 15 years
> is not much for such a big code base.
>

In addition, it is not really 15 years. It is not like you realize a new
standard in '99 and you have got a well working compiler for all the
platforms that Linux supports.
_______________________________________________
busybox mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/busybox

Reply via email to