On Monday 13 August 2007 00:45:17 Michael Trimarchi wrote: > > >> + return -EBUSY; > >> + > >> + memcpy(dev->dev_addr, addr->sa_data, dev->addr_len); > >> + > >> + for (i = 0; i < 3; i++) > >> + write_srom_word(db, i, > >> + cpu_to_le16(((u16 *) (addr->sa_data))[i])); > >> > > > > Nope. > > > > write_srom_word(db, i, le16_to_cpu(((__le16 *) (addr->sa_data))[i])); > > > > > Are you sure?
Yes I am. cpu_to_le16 simply doesn't make any sense at all here, while le16_to_cpu does make sense and is indeed correct. Though they both generate the same asm code. Running sparse also tells you more about this. ;) -- Greetings Michael. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
