[PATCH 0/6] drivers: convert struct spinlock to spinlock_t

2012-11-30 Thread Arend van Spriel
On 11/30/2012 09:25 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: > On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 11:18 AM, Luis R. Rodriguez > wrote: >> On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 12:38 AM, Arend van Spriel >> wrote: >>> So what is the rationale here. During mainlining our drivers we had to >>> remove all uses of 'typedef struct foo fo

Re: [PATCH 0/6] drivers: convert struct spinlock to spinlock_t

2012-11-30 Thread Arend van Spriel
On 11/30/2012 09:25 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: > On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 11:18 AM, Luis R. Rodriguez > wrote: >> On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 12:38 AM, Arend van Spriel >> wrote: >>> So what is the rationale here. During mainlining our drivers we had to >>> remove all uses of 'typedef struct foo fo

Re: [PATCH 0/6] drivers: convert struct spinlock to spinlock_t

2012-11-30 Thread Luis R. Rodriguez
On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 11:18 AM, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: > On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 12:38 AM, Arend van Spriel 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 spen

Re: [PATCH 0/6] drivers: convert struct spinlock to spinlock_t

2012-11-30 Thread Luis R. Rodriguez
On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 12:38 AM, Arend van Spriel 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 ex

Re: [PATCH 0/6] drivers: convert struct spinlock to spinlock_t

2012-11-30 Thread Arend van Spriel
On 11/29/2012 09:45 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: > From: "Luis R. Rodriguez" > > Turns out a few drivers have strayed away from using the > spinlock_t typedef and decided to use struct spinlock > directly. This series converts these drivers to use > spinlock_t. Each change has been compile tested

[PATCH 0/6] drivers: convert struct spinlock to spinlock_t

2012-11-30 Thread Luis R. Rodriguez
On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 11:18 AM, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: > On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 12:38 AM, Arend van Spriel > 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 s

[PATCH 0/6] drivers: convert struct spinlock to spinlock_t

2012-11-30 Thread Luis R. Rodriguez
On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 12:38 AM, Arend van Spriel 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 e

[PATCH 0/6] drivers: convert struct spinlock to spinlock_t

2012-11-30 Thread Arend van Spriel
On 11/29/2012 09:45 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: > From: "Luis R. Rodriguez" > > Turns out a few drivers have strayed away from using the > spinlock_t typedef and decided to use struct spinlock > directly. This series converts these drivers to use > spinlock_t. Each change has been compile tested

[PATCH 0/6] drivers: convert struct spinlock to spinlock_t

2012-11-29 Thread Luis R. Rodriguez
From: "Luis R. Rodriguez" Turns out a few drivers have strayed away from using the spinlock_t typedef and decided to use struct spinlock directly. This series converts these drivers to use spinlock_t. Each change has been compile tested with allmodconfig and sparse checked. Driver developers may

[PATCH 0/6] drivers: convert struct spinlock to spinlock_t

2012-11-29 Thread Luis R. Rodriguez
From: "Luis R. Rodriguez" Turns out a few drivers have strayed away from using the spinlock_t typedef and decided to use struct spinlock directly. This series converts these drivers to use spinlock_t. Each change has been compile tested with allmodconfig and sparse checked. Driver developers may