Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 27 Jun 2004 01:08:01 +0200 | From | Andries Brouwer <> | Subject | Re: drivers/block/ub.c |
| |
On Sun, Jun 27, 2004 at 12:59:04AM +0200, Oliver Neukum wrote:
>>>>+ cmd->cdb[2] = block >> 24; >>>>+ cmd->cdb[3] = block >> 16; >>>>+ cmd->cdb[4] = block >> 8; >>>>+ cmd->cdb[5] = block; >>> >>> we have macros for that. >>> >>>>+ cmd->cdb[7] = nblks >> 8; >>>>+ cmd->cdb[8] = nblks; >>> >>> dito >> >> Yes, we have macros. Using those macros would not at all be an improvement here. > > How do you arrive at that unusual conclusion?
The above writes clearly and simply what one wants. I expect that you propose writing
*((u32 *)(cmd->cdb + 2)) = cpu_to_be32(block);
or some similar unspeakable ugliness. If you had something else in mind, please reveal what. - 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/
| |