Re: [linux-usb-devel] Re: [Bluetooth] HCI USB driver update. Support for SCO over HCI USB.

[Max Krasnyansky <maxk@qualcomm.com>]

At 05:48 PM 5/9/2003, David Brownell wrote:
>Greg KH wrote:
>>On Fri, May 09, 2003 at 03:35:36PM -0700, Max Krasnyansky wrote:
>>
>>>Ok. Sounds like it should be
>>>        uint32_t hcd_cb[16]; // 64 bytes for internal use by HCD
>>>        uint32_t drv_cb[2];  // 8  bytes for internal use by USB driver
>>
>>s/uint32_t/u32/ please.
>
>"u32" is prettier, but is there actually a policy against using
>the more standard type names?  (POSIX, someone had said.)
>
>
>>And if this is going to be used for pointers, why not just say they are
>>pointers?  Otherwise people are going to have to be careful with 32 vs.
>>64 bit kernels to not overrun their space.
>>struct sk_buff uses a char, any reason not to use that here too?  Has
>>being a char made things more difficult for that structure over time?
>
>No, it's just that in some similar cases having the value be "long"
>(not "32 bit unsigned") has been simpler.  I'm not religious.
I don't care either. 'char' is ok for me.

So, I guess in general you're ok with adding ->drv_cb and ->hcd_cb to 'struct urb' ?

Max