On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 05:47:14PM +0100, Eric Sesterhenn wrote: > * Jörn Engel (joern@xxxxxxxxx) wrote: > > On Fri, 16 January 2009 16:07:00 -0700, Tom Rini wrote: > > > > > > Sounds like a plan to me, except maybe zlib_inflate_unsafe() and a > > > comment above the wrapper saying what/why is going on? > > > > Eric, will you do the honors? Since you did all the hard work before, > > you derserve the fame as well. :) > > Since I am not sure either about xtensa I added chris to the cc list. How about we just change all callers from arch/*/boot to use the _unsafe version? Then.. > +/* > + These two wrappers decide wheter strm->next_out gets checked for NULL. > + The zlib_inflate_unsafe() version got added because the PPC zImage > + gets extracted to memory address 0 and therefore > + we avoid this check for zlib_inflate_unsafe() These two wrappers decide wheter strm->next_out gets checked for NULL. The zlib_inflate_unsafe() version is primarily used in the pre-Linux 'boot' directory code to allow for extraction to memory address 0 and therefore we avoid this check. -- Tom Rini -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
