Re: [patch][revision #2] Add w100 framebuffer driver

["Antonino A. Daplas" <adaplas@hotpop.com>]

On Thursday 13 January 2005 08:47, Richard Purdie wrote:
> Antonino A. Daplas:
> > On Sunday 09 January 2005 02:37, Richard Purdie wrote:
> >> +static void w100fb_clear_screen(uint32_t mode, long int offset);
> >
> > I'll submit the patch but would it be better to use u32/u32* and family?
>
> I seem to recall reading somewhere that uint32_t was the preferred form in
> the kernel. The code I was working from used a mixture so I made it
> consistent. If u32 is preferred, I'm happy enough to change it...

For the sake of consistency, yes (only gbefb uses uint32_t and family).
And, it would seem that Linus prefers (to put it mildly) u32 over uint32_t.
See

http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-kernel&m=110304822716805&w=2

>
> > BTW, I'm also submitting Andrew's backlight/lcd patch to akpm. Do you
> > think
> > you can port your backlight driver to this framework?
>
> I've been communicating with Andrew offlist and my backlight driver
> actually uses his framework already! It was me who put him onto the
> blanking event idea as that was the previous stumbling block for his patch.
> I was planning on submitting the corgi backlight driver as soon as the
> class is approved (the other code it depends upon has just been approved).

Great.

Tony




-------------------------------------------------------
The SF.Net email is sponsored by: Beat the post-holiday blues
Get a FREE limited edition SourceForge.net t-shirt from ThinkGeek.
It's fun and FREE -- well, almost....http://www.thinkgeek.com/sfshirt