[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAB=NE6UO8jPYOktteaLeihVqLp251-Q=jv5z_OThXoR+JtRKeg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2012 11:18:37 -0800
From: "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@...not-panic.com>
To: Arend van Spriel <arend@...adcom.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, tglx@...utronix.de,
backports@...r.kernel.org, alexander.stein@...tec-electronic.com,
brudley@...adcom.com, rvossen@...adcom.com, frankyl@...adcom.com,
kanyan@...adcom.com, linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org,
brcm80211-dev-list@...adcom.com, kyungmin.park@...sung.com,
s.nawrocki@...sung.com, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-media@...r.kernel.org, daniel.vetter@...ll.ch,
intel-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org, dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org,
srinidhi.kasagar@...ricsson.com, linus.walleij@...aro.org,
"gregkh@...uxfoundation.org" <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/6] drivers: convert struct spinlock to spinlock_t
On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 12:38 AM, Arend van Spriel <arend@...adcom.com> wrote:
> So what is the rationale here. During mainlining our drivers we had to
> remove all uses of 'typedef struct foo foo_t;'. The Linux CodingStyle
> (chapter 5 Typedefs) is spending a number of lines explaining why.
>
> So is spinlock_t an exception to this rule simply because the kernel
> uses spinlock_t all over the place.
Yes.
Luis
--
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