Re: [PATCH net-next 1/2] wireless: Remove casts of void *

[Joe Perches]

On Tue, 2011-06-14 at 15:23 +1000, Julian Calaby wrote:
> Joe,

Hi Julian.

> On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 14:02, Joe Perches <joe@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > Unnecessary casts of void * clutter the code.
> > These are the remainder casts after several specific
> > patches to remove netdev_priv and dev_priv.
> You seem to have removed a lot of casts that don't relate to these cleanups.
> In particular, some of the casts seem to relate more to documentation
> rather than just changing pointer types to make the compiler happy.

All of the cast removals are casts of void* types.
I think none of of the casts are useful.
None of them are required, all are duplicative.

> In
> particular, I'm referring to the casts describing the different usages
> of data_buf in mwiflex, and around some pointer math in ath9k.

Can you describe more in detail why you think these are documentary?

This sort of cast:

diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/mwifiex/11n.c b/drivers/net/wireless/mwifiex/11n.c
@@ -191,7 +191,7 @@ int mwifiex_ret_11n_cfg(struct host_cmd_ds_command *resp, void *data_buf)
 	struct host_cmd_ds_11n_cfg *htcfg = &resp->params.htcfg;
 
 	if (data_buf) {
-		tx_cfg = (struct mwifiex_ds_11n_tx_cfg *) data_buf;
+               tx_cfg = data_buf;

I think pretty useless.  tx_cfg is a struct mwifiex_ds_11n_tx_cfg *.

> Whilst I'm sure that the compiler is smart enough to handle automatic
> casts between pointer types, some of these, in particular the mwiflex
> bits, add some documentation to the code.

I think not.  Opinions of course can vary.

cheers, Joe

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/