Hi Roland, On Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 19:41, Roland Vossen <[email protected]> wrote: > Hello Julian, > >>> Signed-off-by: Roland Vossen<[email protected]> >>> Reviewed-by: Arend van Spriel<[email protected]> >>> --- >>> diff --git a/drivers/staging/brcm80211/brcmsmac/aiutils.c >>> b/drivers/staging/brcm80211/brcmsmac/aiutils.c >>> index a25901e..5a5fc4b 100644 >>> --- a/drivers/staging/brcm80211/brcmsmac/aiutils.c >>> +++ b/drivers/staging/brcm80211/brcmsmac/aiutils.c >>> @@ -1279,9 +1279,9 @@ ai_register_intr_callback(struct si_pub *sih, void >>> *intrsoff_fn, >>> >>> sii = SI_INFO(sih); >>> sii->intr_arg = intr_arg; >>> - sii->intrsoff_fn = (si_intrsoff_t) intrsoff_fn; >>> - sii->intrsrestore_fn = (si_intrsrestore_t) intrsrestore_fn; >>> - sii->intrsenabled_fn = (si_intrsenabled_t) intrsenabled_fn; >>> + sii->intrsoff_fn = (u32 (*)(void *)) intrsoff_fn; >>> + sii->intrsrestore_fn = (void (*) (void *, u32)) intrsrestore_fn; >>> + sii->intrsenabled_fn = (bool (*)(void *)) intrsenabled_fn; >>> /* save current core id. when this function called, the current >>> core >>> * must be the core which provides driver functions(il, et, wl, >>> etc.) >>> */ >> >> Are these casts necessary - as in could better types be chosen for >> these function pointers and the underlying functions themselves? >> I see the same issue in patches 6 - 10. > > The first goal was to replace the typedefs, in a way that is obvious to the > reviewer. The next step is to get rid of void* where possible (I agree with > you that it is ugly).
Fair enough. > Is it ok with you if we submit a separate patch train for that (since there > are quite some void* to be replaced) ? That's fine, I was just drawing your attention to them. Thanks, -- Julian Calaby Email: [email protected] Profile: http://www.google.com/profiles/julian.calaby/ .Plan: http://sites.google.com/site/juliancalaby/ _______________________________________________ devel mailing list [email protected] http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
