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

[Jens Taprogge]

On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 02:13:30PM +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;
> 
> regards,
> dan carpenter

Doing a quick
  grep " le16 "
in drivers I have not found a single occurance that is not within 
a comment.  There are plenty of __le16 occurances though.

Best Regards,
Jens
--
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/