On Wed, 2009-09-23 at 17:49 -0700, Jing Huang wrote: > + > + return (*(union bfi_addr_u *) &addr); > +} Have you run checkpatch on this code? It produces many errors due to your "return" usage for one.. The usual style of return is not to use parentheses since it's really not a function .. The line I quoted above gives the following error, ERROR: return is not a function, parentheses are not required #266: FILE: drivers/scsi/bfa/bfa_cb_ioim_macros.h:132: + return (*(union bfi_addr_u *) &addr); First of all I'd consider making your code consistent with respect to the return statements .. I noticed that you sometimes use the parentheses sometimes not .. Since it's more with Linux style I'd just remove all the extra parentheses.. Checkpatch produces many other errors in your code .. If you haven't already evaluated those errors, I'd do go through each patch and review the errors (and the warnings) that it produces since checkpatch can give you a fairly mechanical view into how well your code matches the Linux coding style. The less the output from checkpatch the better .. Daniel -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
