Messages in this thread | | | From | Linus Torvalds <> | Date | Fri, 6 Aug 2010 10:56:00 -0700 | Subject | Re: [GIT PULL] x86/asm for 2.6.36 |
| |
On Fri, Aug 6, 2010 at 10:45 AM, H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com> wrote: > > It's worth noting that in this particular case the code itself looks > like this: > > set_64bit((unsigned long *)&irte->low, irte_modified->low); > set_64bit((unsigned long *)&irte->high, irte_modified->high); > > ... where the existing cast is there because irte->low and irte->high > are types __u64. In other words, with the "more logical" u64 prototype > the casts should just get removed.
Ok, right you are. I'll just remove the casts, since that makes the code look better. Maybe it will cause warnings on some other plaform, but I do agree that maybe the right thing to do is to just say "set_64bit() should have taken a u64 * to begin with".
> On the other hand I should have seen this sooner, obviously.
Yeah, I didn't look at the code, I just reacted to "hmm, this results in new warnings, not good".
Linus -- 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/
| |