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.)
regards,
dan carpenter
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
