Re: [PATCH 03/20] Staging: ipack/bridges/tpci200: provide newcallbacks to tpci200

[Dan Carpenter]

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;

regards,
dan carpenter

--
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/