From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Sergei Shtylyov Date: Wed, 03 Apr 2013 13:22:22 +0000 Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] ARM: shmobile: R8A7779: add Ether support Message-Id: <515C2D0E.8010607@cogentembedded.com> List-Id: References: <201304020204.54546.sergei.shtylyov@cogentembedded.com> <87wqsl6ale.wl%kuninori.morimoto.gx@renesas.com> <515AC546.90905@cogentembedded.com> <87txnocw6n.wl%kuninori.morimoto.gx@renesas.com> In-Reply-To: <87txnocw6n.wl%kuninori.morimoto.gx@renesas.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Hello. On 03-04-2013 4:08, Kuninori Morimoto wrote: >>> Then, this (void *pdata) should be >>> (struct sh_eth_plat_data *pdata) IMO >> ether_device.dev.platform_data is 'void *'. I didn't want to bring in >> extra header for the little use. > Not enough reason for me. > "void *" means there is no pointer check, > and extra header is just 1 line. No ? There's no pointer check either if we just initialize the 'platform_data' member as part of the platfrom device initializer, so we can actually stuff pointer to any nonsense there. Why make this case different? > If you want to use this style, > then, additional extra header is fate, IMO We can agree to disagree here. :-) WBR, Sergei