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

[Samuel Iglesias Gonsálvez]

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

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part