Messages in this thread |  | | | Date | Mon, 6 Dec 2004 22:47:56 +0100 (CET) | | From | Jesper Juhl <> | | Subject | Re: [PATCH 2.6] clean-up: fixes "shadows global", "unused parameter" warnings |
| |
On Mon, 6 Dec 2004, Riina Kikas wrote:
> This patch fixes warnings "declaration of `prefetch' shadows a global > declaration" > (occuring on line 141) and "unused parameter `addr'" (occuring on line 136) > > Signed-off-by: Riina Kikas <Riina.Kikas@mail.ee> > > --- a/arch/i386/mm/fault.c 2004-12-02 21:30:30.000000000 +0000 > +++ b/arch/i386/mm/fault.c 2004-12-02 21:30:59.000000000 +0000 > @@ -133,12 +133,12 @@ > * Sometimes AMD Athlon/Opteron CPUs report invalid exceptions on prefetch. > * Check that here and ignore it. > */ > -static int __is_prefetch(struct pt_regs *regs, unsigned long addr) > +static int __is_prefetch(struct pt_regs *regs)
If you make that change, at least also change the caller of __is_prefetch As the patch stands it will break the build of fault.c - I suspect you didn't compile test it.??
Also, addr gets passed in to is_prefetch() from several different locations before it gets passed on to __is_prefetch() - are you sure it's correct to just remove the function argument - can you prove that it does no harm? could it be that the correct fix would be to actually use it for something instead? I don't know the code enough to be able to answer that, but I think it's a good question that needs to be answered.
What kernel source is this against? it doesn't seem to apply to my 2.6.10-rc3-bk2 tree here.
-- Jesper Juhl
- 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/
|  |