On 2010-04-17 12:00 AM, Pavel Roskin wrote: > On Thu, 2010-04-15 at 17:38 -0400, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: >> From: Vasanthakumar Thiagarajan <vasanth@xxxxxxxxxxx> >> >> Signed-off-by: Vasanthakumar Thiagarajan <vasanth@xxxxxxxxxxx> > >> - struct ath_desc *bf_desc; /* virtual addr of desc */ >> + void *bf_desc; /* virtual addr of desc */ > > Why? > > The obvious downside is that bf_desc becomes compatible with pointers of > any type. Because on AR9300 where it's used, it points to a struct ar9003_txc instead. > The only upside I can think of is that bf_desc won't be dereferenced by > accident. The same could be done by using a scalar type or > __attribute__((noderef)). I don't think a scalar type makes any sense for this, because it is a pointer, and it does get passed to functions that dereference it. In cases where struct ar9003_txc is used, it'd have to pass through either an explicit cast or an implicit one going through void* anyway, so we might as well make it clear that while bf_desc is a valid pointer, it does not always point to struct ath_desc - Felix -- 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
