On Thu, 2008-06-05 at 00:20 +0100, Russell King wrote: > On Wed, Jun 04, 2008 at 12:39:45PM -0700, Harvey Harrison wrote: > > On Wed, 2008-06-04 at 21:34 +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > > > On Wed, 4 Jun 2008, Harvey Harrison wrote: > > > > On Mon, 2008-06-02 at 21:15 +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > > > > > On Mon, 2 Jun 2008, Harvey Harrison wrote: > > > Sounds still a bit strange to me... > > > > > > As `get' and `put' have connotations of reference counts, what about > > > `load' and `store', e.g. `load_le32()' and `store_be16()'? > > > > > > > Well, load is covered by le16_to_cpup and friends. > > What about the logical cpu_to_le16p then? > Already exists, but it is not like the proposed store_le16, it just has the types reversed. u16 le16_to_cpup(__le16 *p) __le16 cpu_to_le16p(u16 *p) Currently you see things like: *(__le16 *)ptr = cpu_to_le16(val); Hence my idea for a: store_le16(ptr, val); Harvey -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arch" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
