On Tue, Feb 19, 2008 at 06:45:42PM +0100, Marcin Slusarz wrote:
quoted text
> On Tue, Feb 19, 2008 at 12:22:19AM +0100, Roel Kluin wrote:
> > Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > On Wed, 13 Feb 2008 10:41:44 +0100 Roel Kluin <12o3l@tiscali.nl> wrote:
> > > 
> > >> you may also want these:
> > >> ---
> > >> [bl]e_add_cpu conversion in return
> > 
> > > upsets powerpc (at least):
> > > 
> > > fs/ufs/swab.h: In function `fs64_add':
> > > fs/ufs/swab.h:47: warning: passing arg 1 of `le64_add_cpu' from incompatible pointer type
> > > fs/ufs/swab.h:49: warning: passing arg 1 of `be64_add_cpu' from incompatible pointer type
> > > fs/ufs/swab.h: In function `fs64_sub':
> > > fs/ufs/swab.h:58: warning: passing arg 1 of `le64_add_cpu' from incompatible pointer type
> > > fs/ufs/swab.h:60: warning: passing arg 1 of `be64_add_cpu' from incompatible pointer type
> > 
> > sorry for this. Is it correct to cast like the patch below does?
> I don't think so. Their prototypes are wrong. We can:
> a) remove fs64_add and fs64_sub as nobody use them
> b) fix them - change second parameter do __fs64 (and convert to [bl]e64_add_cpu)
> 
> Evgeniy?
> 

I vote for removing unused code.

-- 
/Evgeniy

--
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/