[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YlWBUGBY6mdjM9iH@kroah.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2022 15:40:32 +0200
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: Philipp Hortmann <philipp.g.hortmann@...il.com>
Cc: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>,
Forest Bond <forest@...ttletooquiet.net>,
linux-staging@...ts.linux.dev, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 4/7] staging: vt6655: Replace VNSvOutPortB with
iowrite8
On Tue, Apr 12, 2022 at 08:45:53AM +0200, Philipp Hortmann wrote:
> On 4/12/22 08:37, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 11, 2022 at 10:49:39PM +0200, Philipp Hortmann wrote:
> > > Replace macro VNSvOutPortB with iowrite8.
> > > The name of macro and the arguments use CamelCase which
> > > is not accepted by checkpatch.pl
> > >
> > > For constants from 0 to below 0x80 the u8 cast was omitted.
> > > For variables which are defined as unsigned char the u8 is omitted.
> > I hate that GCC prints warnings for this. Useless. Horrible. But I
> > understand that GCC does and we haven't figured out how to disable it
> > or who needs to approve that.
> >
> > But even then I still don't understand the casting in this patch.
> >
> > Shouldn't the rule be to do the minimum work arounds to silence GCC?
> > My understand is that the the casting is only needed when you're dealing
> > with a bitwise negated constant. These are macros so the parameters
> > might be constant so basically any bitwise negate gets a cast.
> >
>
> Please send me the compiler flags you are using.
> I was using:
> make "KCFLAGS=-pipe -Wall" -C . M=drivers/staging/vt6655/
Why are you adding random flags to the build? Just stick with the
default ones, that's all you need.
thanks,
greg k-h
Powered by blists - more mailing lists