[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1211331501.5915.248.camel@brick>
Date: Tue, 20 May 2008 17:58:21 -0700
From: Harvey Harrison <harvey.harrison@...il.com>
To: Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
Cc: jgarzik@...ox.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] misc drivers/net endianness noise
On Wed, 2008-05-21 at 01:55 +0100, Al Viro wrote:
> On Tue, May 20, 2008 at 05:48:00PM -0700, Harvey Harrison wrote:
> > I was contemplating an api like:
> >
> > void put_le16(u16 val, __le16 *ptr)
> > {
> > *ptr = cpu_to_le16(val);
> > }
> >
> > which would allow the above to become:
> >
> > if (catc->is_f5u011)
> > put_be16(skb->len, tx_buf);
> > else
> > put_le16(skb->len, tx_buf);
> >
> > Thoughts?
>
> Do not grow API too much. Mental savings on recognizing what's done are
> offset by need to remember more helper functions...
Fair point, I was hoping to get the following family:
get_le16
put_le16
get_unaligned_le16
put_unaligned_le16
And get rid of the le16_to_cpup api.
Then the it's explicit when alignment is an issue, and the endianess is
also explicit. That and I think it just looks nicer than the existing
*p versions.
Just a thought,
Harvey
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists