On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 05:47:36PM -0800, Stephen Boyd wrote: > On 01/28/13 17:39, Mark Brown wrote:
> > We could but I tend not to if the interface strictly requires that the > > pointers be type punnable. > What is the interface requiring strict type punning here? async_write? Yes, the async data must always be the first member of the bus specific struct. This is to avoid having to do an additional allocation for the bus specific private data. > I just hope we don't move the fields around in the regmap_async_spi > struct and then this code silently breaks. I hope the compiler is smart > enough to skip doing any math if we used container_of() with the current > struct layout. It would break anyway, like I say the interface relies on it currently. The other option is to do a callback into the bus code and return the contained structure but it seemed more involved and this is fairly idiomatic.
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
