Jiri Pirko <j...@resnulli.us> wrote: >>> + int (*port_init)(struct rocker_port *rocker_port, void *priv, >>> + void *port_priv); >> >> Yuck, void *. Can we do better? > > I see nothing wrong with this priv usage. It's done like this on many > places. I think it is completely legit, since the call points are well > defined and wrapped.
This particular call is perhaps the most troubling. In general, if there is one void parameter you may well get a compile error on a non-void parameter if you get them switched around. With two void parameters that is no longer the case, making it even more error-prone than the other uses of void *. -- Mark Rustad, Networking Division, Intel Corporation
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
