On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 12:25 PM, Jaya Durga <rjdurga@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Fix checkpatch.pl issue
> WARNING: Use of volatile is usually wrong:
> see Documentation/process/volatile-considered-harmful.rst
Now I've only had a very quick look at the code using this. Could you
elaborate on why just removing the volatile keyword is enough, and
that this isn't related to some smelly bit of code that should be
implemented differently?
> Signed-off-by: Jaya Durga <jayad@xxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/staging/wlan-ng/hfa384x.h | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/wlan-ng/hfa384x.h b/drivers/staging/wlan-ng/hfa384x.h
> index 310e2c4..015945f 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/wlan-ng/hfa384x.h
> +++ b/drivers/staging/wlan-ng/hfa384x.h
> @@ -1175,7 +1175,7 @@ struct hfa384x_usbctlx {
> enum ctlx_state state; /* Tracks running state */
>
> struct completion done;
> - volatile int reapable; /* Food for the reaper task */
> + int reapable; /* Food for the reaper task */
>
> ctlx_cmdcb_t cmdcb; /* Async command callback */
> ctlx_usercb_t usercb; /* Async user callback, */
> --
> 1.9.1
Frans
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
