Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: Am I paranoid or is everyone out to break my kernel builds (Breakage in drivers/pcmcia) | From | Rusty Russell <> | Date | Fri, 22 Oct 2004 09:46:26 +1000 |
| |
On Thu, 2004-10-21 at 19:50, Russell King wrote: > On Thu, Oct 21, 2004 at 02:31:35AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > > Russell King <rmk+lkml@arm.linux.org.uk> wrote: > > > Take special note of the '&' before 'num' in the above initialiser, and > > > check the structure: > > > > Something's out of whack with your tree. You should have: > > Ok, but what's the point of the change? If it's to indicate that > we're returning a value, shouldn't the other module_param* macros > also be fixed in the same way, or do we just like special cases?
Only module_param_array() sets a number: the number of elements in the array. By making that arg a pointer, we can put "NULL" there, since it turned out many people didn't care how many elements there were (and were overloading the same variable for all their arrays, which breaks printing in sysfs).
Hope that helps, Rusty. -- Anyone who quotes me in their signature is an idiot -- Rusty Russell
- 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/
| |