2010/1/25 John W. Linville <[email protected]>: > On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 07:53:19PM +0100, Michael Buesch wrote: >> On Monday 25 January 2010 19:36:27 Rafał Miłecki wrote: >> > W dniu 25 stycznia 2010 19:35 użytkownik Rafał Miłecki >> > <[email protected]> napisał: >> > > 2010/1/25 Michael Buesch <[email protected]>: >> > >> On Monday 25 January 2010 18:59:59 Rafał Miłecki wrote: >> > >>> +/* Complex number using 2 32-bit signed integers */ >> > >>> +typedef struct { s32 i, q; } b43_c32; >> > >> >> > >> No typedef. ever. >> > > >> > > Well, I just copied (Gabor's?) code here. But of course I can fix this >> > > by the way, no problem :) >> >> Yeah, I saw that. We can fix it while we're at it. ;) >> >> > > Just read about typedef in Linux Kernel Coding Style, didn't know >> > > about this earlier. Thanks for pointing. >> > >> > Is this OK to fix this in separated patch? Or should I modify this set >> > of patches? >> >> Well, as you touch any reference to the typedef anyway (you renamed it), >> you can just put the keyword "struct" in front of the references and no >> separate patch is needed. >> It won't even grow your current patch in the number of changed lines. > > I took care of these modifications to the original patch...
Hey, thank you! :) -- Rafał _______________________________________________ Bcm43xx-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/bcm43xx-dev
