Re: evdev types

[Vojtech P. <vo...@su...>]

On Thu, Apr 18, 2002 at 05:43:58PM +1000, Brad Hards wrote:
> On Thu, 18 Apr 2002 17:33, Vojtech Pavlik wrote:
> <snip>
> > > Why use long arrays for the bitfields? Why not byte arrays? This seems
> > > like the easiest way to clean up your concerns with 32/64 split systems,
> > > and also to clean up this.
> >
> > Because set_bit/test_bit and friends all operate on longs.
> Ah.
> 
> > Regarding the two bytes/four bytes stuff we can:
> >
> > 1) Remove the warning and all will work OK
> >
> > or
> >
> > 2) Don't warn if the valid bits actually fit
> I like 2. Do you want a patch?

Send it if you have the time to do it. Right now, I don't.

> > And for /proc and hotplug I think we can specify that we'll always use
> > 32-bit numbers (we currently use longs (%lx), where the size varies
> > between 32 and 64-bit kernels on the same system).
> You can fix that - I'm not doing 2.5 yet :)

I will. It's not tough.

-- 
Vojtech Pavlik
SuSE Labs