Date: Wed, 13 Mar 1996 06:46:25 +1100 From: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au> To: bde@zeta.org.au, wollman@lcs.mit.edu Cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/sys conf.h Message-ID: <199603121946.GAA02539@godzilla.zeta.org.au>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>>> (struct mbuf *)cmd, (struct mbuf *)data, (struct mbuf *)0)); >> Actually, this is another point in favor of not making the ioctl cmd >> field long. Longs are less likely to fit in pointers than ints. The >> above would certainly fail for 16-bit pointers. >So what? We are never going to have to deal with this situation. The >only situations of relevance are: >32-bit int, 32-bit long, 32-bit pointer (all 32-bit systems) >32-bit int, 64-bit long, 64-bit pointer (Alpha) >64-bit int, 64-bit long, 64-bit pointer (Cray? ...will happen some day) 64-bit int, 128-bit long, 96-bit pointer (? ...will happen some day) >It works fine in the first case, and it avoids a GCC warning in the >second case. Sounds like the right thing to me. It doesn't help at runtime, and may waste space and time. Bruce
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199603121946.GAA02539>