On 11/7/23 11:26, Laszlo Ersek wrote: > Furthermore, counts of objects should be generally represented as UINTN > values, unless you have a good (explained!) reason for using a different > type.
If the argument is that we need atomics for manipulating CPU counts, and that we don't want to assume wider-than-32-bit atomics, then that is a *valid* argument, but it absolutely must be documented (and then *all* CPU counts in the library class header must be UINT32 *consistently*; not mixing UINT32 with UINTN with INT32). Laszlo -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#110837): https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/110837 Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/102366300/21656 Group Owner: devel+ow...@edk2.groups.io Unsubscribe: https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/leave/9847357/21656/1706620634/xyzzy [arch...@mail-archive.com] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
