On Thu, 9 Oct 2025 16:46:29 +0530 [email protected] wrote: > > +struct enetc_msg_swbd { > + void *vaddr; > + uint64_t dma; > + int size; > +}; > +
Do you really want 'size' to be signed value. Wouldn't uint32_t or size_t be better here.
On Thu, 9 Oct 2025 16:46:29 +0530 [email protected] wrote: > > +struct enetc_msg_swbd { > + void *vaddr; > + uint64_t dma; > + int size; > +}; > +
Do you really want 'size' to be signed value. Wouldn't uint32_t or size_t be better here.