Andy Whitcroft wrote:
quoted text
> On Wed, Jun 18, 2008 at 04:19:38PM +0200, Paolo Ciarrocchi wrote:
>> On Wed, Jun 18, 2008 at 3:09 PM, Dmitri Vorobiev
>> <dmitri.vorobiev@movial.fi> wrote:
>>> Paolo Ciarrocchi wrote:
>>>> -static void fld_const(FPU_REG const *c, int adj, u_char tag)
>>>> +static void fld_const(FPU_REG const * c, int adj, u_char tag)
>>> ________________________________________^
>>>
>>> The above does not seem to me like a big improvement in code quality. A
>>> false positive from checkpatch.pl?
>> Yes, I think you are right.
>> Andy CC'ed so that he can have a look at that.
> 
> That would be a false positive if we are recommending that.  I have
> pushed this fragment in isolation through all versions back to 0.15 and
> none of them recommend it.
> 
> Ahh, but if I push the whole patch through 0.19 spits it out.  Ok this
> is a subtle bug in modifier procesing and is fixed in the head of my
> tree.  Will be fixed in the next batch which goes up to -mm.

Maybe it makes sense for Ingo to revert the original Paolo's patch now?

Dmitri

--
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/