Return-path: Received: from c60.cesmail.net ([216.154.195.49]:60678 "EHLO c60.cesmail.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752772AbYIDBoZ (ORCPT ); Wed, 3 Sep 2008 21:44:25 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH] p54usb: support LM87 firmwares From: Pavel Roskin To: Christian Lamparter Cc: Tomas Winkler , linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, John W Linville , Larry Finger In-Reply-To: <200809030200.50745.chunkeey@web.de> References: <200809022139.12969.chunkeey@web.de> <1ba2fa240809021614t4dfb1422sa82efeae8869ff6b@mail.gmail.com> <200809030200.50745.chunkeey@web.de> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2008 21:44:22 -0400 Message-Id: <1220492662.7700.21.camel@dv> (sfid-20080904_034429_392088_26FF85C0) Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Wed, 2008-09-03 at 02:00 +0200, Christian Lamparter wrote: > whats the main difference between be32_to_cpu vs be32_to_cpus vs be32_to_cpup? > Does the extra p just stand for something like "pointer"? Yes. See include/linux/byteorder/generic.h > > hmm, > if yes, >>*<<(__be32 *)bootrec->data. > if no, please tell me more about it ;-). The pointer versions take the pointer. They do the cast and the dereference for you. The cast in your code should be unnecessary. The in-situ version don't return anything; they put the result into the original variable. -- Regards, Pavel Roskin