On Wed, Jan 02 2008 at 12:08 +0200, Christoph Hellwig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Tue, Jan 01, 2008 at 06:15:46PM +0200, Boaz Harrosh wrote: >> I have this code: >> >> <c_code> >> /* >> * osd-r10 4.12.5 Data-In and Data-Out buffer offsets >> * byte offset = mantissa * (2^(exponent+8)) >> */ >> typedef __be32 osd_cdb_offset; > > Given that you can't do normal arithmetic on this type it should't > really be a __be32 but it's own __bitwise type with proper accessors. There are all the proper accessors, and arithmetic is certainly not possible.
> > But yes, this is one of the rare cases where a typedef makes sense, > but �'d call it osd_off_t or something like that. > You mean osd_cdb_offset_t. I thought of dropping that _t, I hate it, just a personal preference. Point taken about the typedef + __bitwise. Because with __bitwise we tell the compiler that the new type is assembly equivalent to some type but otherwise un-mixable and unique type. Checkpatch actually allows it. Code fixed! Thanks Christoph. Boaz -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
