[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20250113200055.20d9c4f3@kernel.org>
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2025 20:00:55 -0800
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
Cc: Sanman Pradhan <sanman.p211993@...il.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
alexanderduyck@...com, kernel-team@...a.com, andrew+netdev@...n.ch,
davem@...emloft.net, edumazet@...gle.com, pabeni@...hat.com,
kalesh-anakkur.purayil@...adcom.com, linux@...ck-us.net,
mohsin.bashr@...il.com, jdelvare@...e.com, horms@...nel.org,
suhui@...china.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
vadim.fedorenko@...ux.dev, linux-hwmon@...r.kernel.org,
sanmanpradhan@...a.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 2/3] eth: fbnic: hwmon: Add support for reading
temperature and voltage sensors
On Tue, 14 Jan 2025 02:19:08 +0100 Andrew Lunn wrote:
> > @@ -50,6 +50,10 @@ struct fbnic_fw_completion {
> > struct kref ref_count;
> > int result;
> > union {
> > + struct {
> > + s32 millivolts;
> > + s32 millidegrees;
> > + } tsene;
> > } u;
> > };
>
> Why have a union which only has one member?
One member per command, the commit msg on patch 1 mentions:
The data from the various response types will be added to
the "union u" by subsequent commits.
More commands are on the way. It's a coin toss whether it's better to
add the union later or have to re-indent already added structs.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists