On Wed, 2010-03-17 at 23:21 -0700, Joe Perches wrote: > Copied from orinoco, initialize a iw_handler array entry > > Signed-off-by: Joe Perches <joe@xxxxxxxxxxx> > --- > include/linux/wireless.h | 2 ++ > 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/include/linux/wireless.h b/include/linux/wireless.h > index 5b4c6c7..ad9f8d5 100644 > --- a/include/linux/wireless.h > +++ b/include/linux/wireless.h > @@ -346,6 +346,8 @@ > #define SIOCIWFIRST 0x8B00 > #define SIOCIWLAST SIOCIWLASTPRIV /* 0x8BFF */ > #define IW_IOCTL_IDX(cmd) ((cmd) - SIOCIWFIRST) > +#define STD_IW_HANDLER(id, func) \ > + [IW_IOCTL_IDX(id)] = (iw_handler) func > > /* Odd : get (world access), even : set (root access) */ > #define IW_IS_SET(cmd) (!((cmd) & 0x1)) Three objections. 1) STD_IW_HANDLER is a poor name for a header. The name should start with IW, just like those above and below it. 2) Adding STD_IW_HANDLER to wireless.h and removing it from Orinoco in separate commits might create several commits in which Orinoco may not compile. I think gcc would not object if you copy the definition exactly, but I would not rely on it. Making life miserable for bisectors is bad - they are useful creatures. Of course, the argument is moot if you use a different name for the new macro. 3) Abstracting a cast is bad unless it's the whole purpose of the macro. While Orinoco needs the cast, other drivers may not need it. Using a cast could prevent gcc from finding a legitimate problem. -- Regards, Pavel Roskin -- 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
