Re: [PATCH 3/3] typedef cleanup

[Chris Boot]

On 9 Sep 2011, at 09:30, Dan Carpenter wrote:

> On Thu, Sep 08, 2011 at 07:35:37PM +0200, Chris Boot wrote:
>> On 4 Sep 2011, at 21:54, Arvydas Sidorenko wrote:
>> 
>>> #ifndef uint64_t
>>> -typedef struct _uint64_t {
>>> +struct _uint64_t {
>>> 	uint32_t low_dw;
>>> 	uint32_t hi_dw;
>>> } uint64_t;
>>> #endif
>> 
>> This can't be right can it? You're changing a typedef into a
>> variable definition as far as I can see.
> 
> Yes.  You are right.  The "uint64_t" is a variable now so this patch
> is wrong.
> 
> (Or maybe you knew that and the question was rhetorical?  It's hard
> to tell over email.)

Dan,

Sorry, I had just come back well-watered from a nice meal last night! :-) Yes I realised that wasn't what you meant to do with your patch, sorry it came out the wrong way.

Without looking at the code I imagine you could remove the entire definition above, but that's just a guess.

HTH,
Chris

-- 
Chris Boot
bootc@xxxxxxxxx

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/