[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <tkrat.e2bfb30f2c0ae70a@s5r6.in-berlin.de>
Date: Sat, 23 Feb 2008 12:23:30 +0100 (CET)
From: Stefan Richter <stefanr@...6.in-berlin.de>
To: linux1394-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net
cc: Harvey Harrison <harvey.harrison@...il.com>,
Sam Ravnborg <sam@...nborg.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
sparclinux@...r.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@...abs.org,
Kristian Hoegsberg <krh@...planet.net>,
Jarod Wilson <jwilson@...hat.com>
Subject: [PATCH 0/2] firewire: endinaness warnings (was Re: sparse - make
__CHECK_ENDIAN__ default enabled?)
On 20 Feb, Harvey Harrison wrote on LKML:
> On Wed, 2008-02-20 at 23:03 +0100, Sam Ravnborg wrote:
>> Hi Harvey.
>>
>> Can I ask you to look into the worst offenders so we
>> can make -D__CHECK_ENDIAN__ enabled per default
>> in the kernel.
>> Or maybe we should do it anyway?
>
> Well, I've got the worst of fs and drivers/ata done so far, still
> weeping over the 5500 warnings in drivers. (X86_32 allyesconfig).
> People ignore the existing warnings anyway, why not toss a few more
> on the pile?
>
> I'll look them over tonight and see how bad it would be.
I looked into drivers/firewire and drivers/ieee1394. As expected, there
are quite a lot endianess related warnings in the latter because this is
code from way before sparse was regularly used.
There are also a few warnings in the former, even though sparse checks
were run before submission of the whole drivers/firewire stack. I will
follow up with two patches:
1/2 firewire: endianess fix
2/2 firewire: endianess annotations
Whether the "fix" is really a fix remains to be seen; I don't have a big
endian Linux box myself.
--
Stefan Richter
-=====-==--- --=- =-===
http://arcgraph.de/sr/
--
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