On Fri, Sep 05, 2008 at 01:07:45PM -0400, Dan Williams wrote: > On Fri, 2008-09-05 at 11:28 +0800, Wang Chen wrote: > > We have some reasons to kill netdev->priv: > > 1. netdev->priv is equal to netdev_priv(). > > 2. netdev_priv() wraps the calculation of netdev->priv's offset, obviously > > netdev_priv() is more flexible than netdev->priv. > > But we cann't kill netdev->priv, because so many drivers reference to it > > directly. > > > > OK, becasue Dave S. Miller said, "every direct netdev->priv usage is a bug", > > and I want to kill netdev->priv later, I decided to convert all the direct > > reference of netdev->priv first. > > > > Different to readonly reference of netdev->priv, in this driver, netdev->priv > > was changed. I use netdev->ml_priv to replace netdev->priv. > > Same comment as the other two; any reason we can't use netdev_priv() > instead of ->ml_priv? That would be preferable. Actually, I think this one was OK -- the two ml_priv uses were for the extra mesh and rtap devices, which point back to the already allocated priv data for the main device. John -- John W. Linville Linux should be at the core linville@xxxxxxxxxxxxx of your literate lifestyle. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
