lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Sep]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH 03/20] Staging: ipack/bridges/tpci200: provide new callbacks to tpci200
From
Date
On Wed, 2012-09-12 at 14:13 +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 11:28:33AM +0200, Jens Taprogge wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 11:47:02AM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> > > > +static int tpci200_get_clockrate(struct ipack_device *dev)
> > > > +{
> > > > + struct tpci200_board *tpci200 = check_slot(dev);
> > > > + __le16 __iomem *addr;
> > >
> > > The point of the underscores in the __le16 is that you don't want to
> > > pollute user space headers in glibc with a bunch of kernel typedefs.
> > > It is not needed here. (Or if it is, then we would need to replace
> > > the u16 uses as well).
> >
> > I was under the impression that "__le16" is used to indicate the
> > byteorder of the pointed to memory. As far as I can see that
> > information is lost when we use u16. Am I missing something?
> >
>
> Use the no-underscore version unless it's inside a header which is
> exported to userspace.
>
> le16 __iomem *addr;
>

But it is not declared in linux/types, it is?

I have found only this typedef in a quick search:

http://lxr.linux.no/#linux+v3.5.3/fs/ntfs/types.h#L28

Should we define them in ipack.h header file or they are defined in
other place?

Best regards,

Sam
[unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature]
\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2012-09-12 14:01    [W:0.135 / U:2.240 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site