On Mon, May 30, 2011 at 11:07:49AM +0200, Antonio Ospite wrote: > On Mon, 23 May 2011 17:10:23 +0200 > > +#define STRUCT_FIELD(s, f) ((s) && (s)->f ? (s)->f : NULL ) > Any opinion on this macro? See its use below. It is meant to deal with > driver specific struct fields, which can have arbitrary names, I though > that using some syntactic sugar to deal with those as arguments when > calling the function was not that horrible. > If that looks acceptable to you too I will submit the > mmc_regulator_set_power () patch, otherwise I would ask to consider the > simple patch to mmc_spi.c for now. Would it not be simpler just to provide a standard generic struct that people can embed into their pdata? -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-mmc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
