Messages in this thread | ![/](/images/icornerl.gif) | | Date | Sun, 20 Apr 2003 14:43:36 -0700 (PDT) | Subject | Re: [PATCH] new system call mknod64 | From | "David S. Miller" <> |
| |
From: Andries.Brouwer@cwi.nl Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2003 23:26:24 +0200 (MEST)
Such an abstract statement nobody can disagree with. Do you have an opinion in the mknod case?
If you are trying to reach 64-bit dev_t's, why not use __u64 as the argument?
What I wouldn't be happy with would be any usage of "long" or pointers as that is the usual source of troubles. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| ![\](/images/icornerr.gif) |