[PATCH v5 2/7] mailbox: arm_mhu: add driver for ARM MHU controller

[linux@arm.linux.org.uk (Russell King - ARM Linux)]

On Thu, Feb 05, 2015 at 05:32:39PM +0530, Jassi Brar wrote:
> On Feb 5, 2015 5:13 PM, "Arnd Bergmann" <arnd@arndb.de> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > I know typedef's are frowned upon, but how bad is the following option?
> > >        typedef void*  mbox_data_info
> > >        int mbox_send_message(struct mbox_chan *chan, mbox_data_info
> data);
> >
> > I don't see how that would help.
> >
> If it's abuse because the argument is a void*... What if we called it
> mbox_data_info?  To say platforms are free to pass data as a pointer or a
> value :)

Using a typedef really doesn't change anything.  If you read the kernel
coding style, you'll realise that typedefs are a reason to reject
patches - especially to use them in the way you are proposing.

Try the solution I suggested (which I notice was seemingly totally
ignored.)

-- 
FTTC broadband for 0.8mile line: currently at 10.5Mbps down 400kbps up
according to speedtest.net.