[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <5d6222a80712180440l72faa8fere9588ea6894cf1cb@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2007 10:40:52 -0200
From: "Glauber de Oliveira Costa" <glommer@...il.com>
To: "Rusty Russell" <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>
Cc: "Glauber de Oliveira Costa" <gcosta@...hat.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...e.hu, ehabkost@...hat.com,
jeremy@...p.org, avi@...ranet.com, anthony@...emonkey.ws,
virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org, ak@...e.de,
chrisw@...s-sol.org, rostedt@...dmis.org, hpa@...or.com,
zach@...are.com, roland@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 13/21] [PATCH] change bitwise operations to get a void parameter.
On Dec 18, 2007 3:18 AM, Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au> wrote:
> On Tuesday 18 December 2007 09:52:36 Glauber de Oliveira Costa wrote:
> > This patch changes the bitwise operations in bitops.h to get
> > a void pointers as a parameter. Before this patch, a lot of warnings
> > can be seen. They're gone after it.
>
> No, this is a backwards step! These warnings are important for
> non-arch-specific code: I fought hard to get them made into unsigned longs.
>
> But I'm happy for this to be applied as is, then I'll grab the git tree,
> revert it and fix the warnings...
>
Even before my processor.h patches, there are a lot of warnings caused by this.
If Ingo does not mind getting more warnings, I can drop this patch
entirely, and you (or someone else)
can fix them later on.
--
Glauber de Oliveira Costa.
"Free as in Freedom"
http://glommer.net
"The less confident you are, the more serious you have to act."
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists