Alexey Dobriyan wrote:
> On Saturday 26 February 2005 20:10, Eric Gaumer wrote:
>
>
>>If the code looks problematic could someone point out possible
>>deficiencies so we can work toward a satisfactory resolution? I didn't
>>write the code but I'm willing do what I have to in order to get this
>>(wireless scanning) into the official tree.
>
>
> Uhhh... Started to comment line-by-line but then realized it would take too
> much time.
>
> * Read Documentaion/CodingStyle.
> * Indent code with tabs where it is already indented with tabs.
> * Brackets around a single number in #define's are useless.
> * Use u8, u16, u32 (not uint*_t) where the code already uses them.
> * Comments are supposed to be anonymous.
> * Use appropriate KERN_* constant in printk()'s.
> * Don't pack simple types (uint32_t, ...)
> * Common convention is to return 0 on success, negative number on error.
>   Positive return values don't fit well into this scheme. If possible
>   follow it.
>
> Oh, and the type p80211item_uint32_t when in fact it is a 12-bytes long
> structure ...
>
> 	Alexey

What is the difference between u* and uint*_t ? Both are derived from the same basic data type.

typedef unsigned char __u8;
typedef         __u8            uint8_t;

And...

typedef unsigned char u8;

--
"Education is what remains after one has forgotten everything he learned in school."
	- Albert Einstein