Warner Losh <i...@bsdimp.com> wrote: > On Mon, May 15, 2023 at 10:44 AM Warner Losh <i...@bsdimp.com> wrote: > >> >> >> On Wed, May 10, 2023 at 8:39 AM Juan Quintela <quint...@redhat.com> wrote: >> >>> Someone has a good reason why this is not a good idea? >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Juan Quintela <quint...@redhat.com> >>> >> >> Reviewed by: Warner Losh <i...@bsdimp.com> >> >> This has been that way the bsd-user sources were reorganized in 2015. I >> can find >> no good reason in the FreeBSD sources to do this (we've been transitioning >> from >> the pre-standardized BSD convention of u_intXX_t -> uintXX_t for 25 years >> now >> it seems). I don't see any old or ancient usage as far back as I looked >> why they'd >> be different. Up through FreeBSD 12.x, this was u_int32_t (for all of >> them), but >> they switched to __uint32_t in FreeBSD 13 to avoid namespace pollution. >> >> tl;dr: change good, all should match. >> > > Though a better commit message would be good. With that, I'll queue it to > my branch.
I think your bit of history would be good O:-) Later, Juan.
