On Tue, 2013-02-19 at 10:30 -0600, Michael Christie wrote:
> On Feb 19, 2013, at 2:18 AM, Hannes Reinecke <h...@suse.de> wrote:
>
> > diff --git a/drivers/scsi/cxgbi/libcxgbi.c b/drivers/scsi/cxgbi/libcxgbi.c
> > index b44c1cf..95105c0 100644
> > --- a/drivers/scsi/cxgbi/libcxgbi.c
> > +++ b/drivers/scsi/cxgbi/libcxgbi.c
> > @@ -245,7 +245,7 @@ void cxgbi_hbas_remove(struct cxgbi_device *cdev)
> > }
> > EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(cxgbi_hbas_remove);
> >
> > -int cxgbi_hbas_add(struct cxgbi_device *cdev, unsigned int max_lun,
> > +int cxgbi_hbas_add(struct cxgbi_device *cdev, uint64_t max_lun,
> > unsigned int max_id, struct scsi_host_template *sht,
> > struct scsi_transport_template *stt)
> > {
> > diff --git a/drivers/scsi/cxgbi/libcxgbi.h b/drivers/scsi/cxgbi/libcxgbi.h
> > index 80fa99b..d3b27f8 100644
> > --- a/drivers/scsi/cxgbi/libcxgbi.h
> > +++ b/drivers/scsi/cxgbi/libcxgbi.h
> > @@ -692,7 +692,7 @@ struct cxgbi_device *cxgbi_device_register(unsigned
> > int, unsigned int);
> > void cxgbi_device_unregister(struct cxgbi_device *);
> > void cxgbi_device_unregister_all(unsigned int flag);
> > struct cxgbi_device *cxgbi_device_find_by_lldev(void *);
> > -int cxgbi_hbas_add(struct cxgbi_device *, unsigned int, unsigned int,
> > +int cxgbi_hbas_add(struct cxgbi_device *, uint64_t, unsigned int,
> > struct scsi_host_template *,
> > struct scsi_transport_template *);
> > void cxgbi_hbas_remove(struct cxgbi_device *);
> > diff --git a/drivers/scsi/dc395x.c b/drivers/scsi/dc395x.c
> > index dfe90ce..9acdb9c 100644
>
>
> Could it be possible to use u64, so it matches the rest of the driver
> coding style? The rest of the driver uses the u* definitions instead f
> the uint*_t ones.
In general we should use u64 for kernel internal stuff (which this is).
uint64_t is supposed to be reserved for user interfaces.
James
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
