netdev - Re: linux-next: Tree for June 9 (niu)

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <4C0FD883.8040605@oracle.com>
Date:	Wed, 09 Jun 2010 11:08:03 -0700
From:	Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@...cle.com>
To:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
CC:	sfr@...b.auug.org.au, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-next@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: linux-next: Tree for June 9 (niu)

On 06/09/10 11:06, David Miller wrote:
> From: Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@...cle.com>
> Date: Wed, 9 Jun 2010 10:36:57 -0700
> 
>> On Wed, 9 Jun 2010 13:34:43 +1000 Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>>
>>> Changes since 20100608:
>>>
>>> My fixes tree contains:
>>>       v4l-dvb: update gfp/slab.h includes
>>>       arm: update gfp/slab.h includes
>>>       davinci: update gfp/slab.h includes
>>>       ocfs2: update gfp/slab.h includes
>>>       acpi: update gfp/slab.h includes
>>
>>
>>
>> on x86_64 or i386, CONFIG_OF_DEVICE is not enabled:
>>
>> drivers/net/niu.c:9700: warning: 'struct of_device' declared inside parameter list
>> drivers/net/niu.c:9700: warning: its scope is only this definition or declaration, which is probably not what you want
>> drivers/net/niu.c:9716: warning: assignment from incompatible pointer type
> 
> Hmmm, I'm confused why this never happened before :-)
> 
> We conditionalize linux/of_device.h inclusion with CONFIG_SPARC64, yet
> we unconditionally use "struct of_device *" pointers in the driver
> with no such ifdef protection.
> 
> Even if we unconditionally included linux/of_device.h, that file does
> nothing unless CONFIG_OF_DEVICE is defined so it should have always
> produced these warnings since I can't see from where else it could
> have gotten even a "struct of_device;" somewhere.
> 
> Do you have any idea Randy?  Pease try analyze this further so we can
> fix it properly.


I looked and was confuzed, but I'll look again.

-- 
~Randy
*** Remember to use Documentation/SubmitChecklist when testing your code ***
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html