Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 29 Dec 2009 21:50:45 +0100 | From | Emese Revfy <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 3/4] Constify struct kset_uevent_ops for 2.6.32-git-053fe57ac v2 |
| |
David Rientjes wrote: > On Sat, 26 Dec 2009, Emese Revfy wrote: > >>>> diff --git a/mm/slub.c b/mm/slub.c >>>> index 4996fc7..fb63aca 100644 >>>> --- a/mm/slub.c >>>> +++ b/mm/slub.c >>>> @@ -4522,7 +4522,7 @@ static int uevent_filter(struct kset *kset, struct kobject *kobj) >>>> return 0; >>>> } >>>> >>>> -static struct kset_uevent_ops slab_uevent_ops = { >>>> +static const struct kset_uevent_ops slab_uevent_ops = { >>>> .filter = uevent_filter, >>>> }; >>> CC mm/slub.o >>> mm/slub.c: In function 'slab_sysfs_init': >>> mm/slub.c:4679: warning: passing argument 2 of 'kset_create_and_add' >>> discards qualifiers from pointer target type >>> include/linux/kobject.h:164: note: expected 'struct kset_uevent_ops *' >>> but argument is of type 'const struct kset_uevent_ops *' >>> >>> Hmm? >>> >> I double checked both the declaration and definitions of the affected >> function/structure and they are consistently const here. >> Can you tell me what patch/tree combination you encountered this warning with? >> Thanks, Emese >> > > The warning emitted by gcc is pretty explicit; the second formal of > kset_create_and_add() takes a 'struct kset_uevent_ops *' type while you're > now passing 'const struct kset_uevent_ops *' as the result of your change. > That said, kset_create() could probably be modified with the const > qualifier, but that's outside the scope of your patchset and would have to > be proposed seperately.
I see what you mean, this was part of [PATCH 1/4] that I forgot to CC to you. Emese
| |