[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <200810201304.09727.jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org>
Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2008 13:04:09 -0700
From: Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@...tuousgeek.org>
To: Eric Anholt <eric@...olt.net>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Dave Airlie <airlied@...ux.ie>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, dri-devel@...ts.sf.net
Subject: Re: [git pull] drm patches for 2.6.27-rc1
On Friday, October 17, 2008 7:10 pm Eric Anholt wrote:
> On Fri, 2008-10-17 at 15:43 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > On Fri, 17 Oct 2008, Dave Airlie wrote:
> > So what's the excuse _this_ time for adding all these stupid warnings to
> > my build log? Did nobody test this?
> >
> > drivers/gpu/drm/drm_proc.c: In function ‘drm_gem_one_name_info’:
> > drivers/gpu/drm/drm_proc.c:525: warning: format ‘%d’ expects type
> > ‘int’, but argument 3 has type ‘size_t’ drivers/gpu/drm/drm_proc.c:533:
> > warning: format ‘%9d’ expects type ‘int’, but argument 4 has type
> > ‘size_t’ drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c: In function
> > ‘i915_gem_gtt_pwrite’: drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c:184: warning:
> > unused variable ‘vaddr_atomic’
>
> Yeah, none of us are on x86-64, so we missed those warnings in testing.
Actually, I'm on x86_64 pretty much exclusively and saw these warnings last
week. But I didn't send a fix (yet); sorry.
That said, this code was far from untested, even though it did contain a few
compile warnings, so I think Linus's complaint about UNTESTED CRAP was at
least half wrong.
--
Jesse Barnes, Intel Open Source Technology Center
--
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