Re: [PATCH 13/20] inflate: (arch) kill silly zlib typedefs

2005-11-07 Thread Willy Tarreau
On Tue, Nov 08, 2005 at 03:05:57PM +0900, Miles Bader wrote: > Willy Tarreau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > I don't know if x86_64 is LP64 or LLP64 on Linux, but at least my alpha > > and sparc64 are LP64, so is another PPC64 I use for code validation. > > LPC64 is the recommended model for easier

Re: [PATCH 13/20] inflate: (arch) kill silly zlib typedefs

2005-11-07 Thread Miles Bader
Willy Tarreau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I don't know if x86_64 is LP64 or LLP64 on Linux, but at least my alpha > and sparc64 are LP64, so is another PPC64 I use for code validation. > LPC64 is the recommended model for easier 32 to 64 portability (where > ints are 32 ; long, longlong, ptrs are

Re: [PATCH 13/20] inflate: (arch) kill silly zlib typedefs

2005-11-01 Thread Geert Uytterhoeven
On Tue, 1 Nov 2005, Willy Tarreau wrote: > On Tue, Nov 01, 2005 at 08:50:43AM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > > On Tue, 1 Nov 2005, Willy Tarreau wrote: > > > But if it's a pointer why don't you declare them unsigned long then ? > > > C defines the long as the integer the right size to store a p

Re: [PATCH 13/20] inflate: (arch) kill silly zlib typedefs

2005-11-01 Thread Willy Tarreau
On Tue, Nov 01, 2005 at 08:50:43AM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > On Tue, 1 Nov 2005, Willy Tarreau wrote: > > But if it's a pointer why don't you declare them unsigned long then ? > > C defines the long as the integer the right size to store a pointer. > ^ > Is it C? Yes, that's what I read

Re: [PATCH 13/20] inflate: (arch) kill silly zlib typedefs

2005-10-31 Thread Geert Uytterhoeven
On Tue, 1 Nov 2005, Willy Tarreau wrote: > But if it's a pointer why don't you declare them unsigned long then ? > C defines the long as the integer the right size to store a pointer. ^ Is it C? Since on Wintendo P64 it's not true... Gr{oetje,eeting}s,

Re: [PATCH 13/20] inflate: (arch) kill silly zlib typedefs

2005-10-31 Thread Willy Tarreau
On Mon, Oct 31, 2005 at 01:14:22PM -0800, Matt Mackall wrote: > On Mon, Oct 31, 2005 at 10:05:15PM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > > On Mon, 31 Oct 2005, Matt Mackall wrote: > > > inflate: remove legacy type definitions from callers > > > > > > This replaces the legacy zlib typedefs and usage w

Re: [PATCH 13/20] inflate: (arch) kill silly zlib typedefs

2005-10-31 Thread Matt Mackall
On Mon, Oct 31, 2005 at 10:05:15PM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > On Mon, 31 Oct 2005, Matt Mackall wrote: > > inflate: remove legacy type definitions from callers > > > > This replaces the legacy zlib typedefs and usage with kernel types in > > all the inflate users. > > > -static ulg free_m

Re: [PATCH 13/20] inflate: (arch) kill silly zlib typedefs

2005-10-31 Thread Geert Uytterhoeven
On Mon, 31 Oct 2005, Matt Mackall wrote: > inflate: remove legacy type definitions from callers > > This replaces the legacy zlib typedefs and usage with kernel types in > all the inflate users. > -static ulg free_mem_ptr; > -static ulg free_mem_ptr_end; > +static u32 free_mem_ptr; > +static u32

[PATCH 13/20] inflate: (arch) kill silly zlib typedefs

2005-10-31 Thread Matt Mackall
inflate: remove legacy type definitions from callers This replaces the legacy zlib typedefs and usage with kernel types in all the inflate users. Signed-off-by: Matt Mackall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Index: 2.6.14/arch/alpha/boot/misc.c =