Re: [Q] warning BUG() related fixing and janitors question

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 7:16 PM, Marcin Ślusarz
<marcin.slusarz@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> It's better to replace it with:
> static inline int flat_set_persistent(unsigned long relval,
>                                                        unsigned long *persistent)
> {
>        return 0;
> }
>
> No warnings, same generated code, type safety.
> Look around the code. It's a very common pattern.
>

Yes, I guess you're right.
Plus it's even easier to understand than that #define in arch/sh.

Are these changes suitable, or am I being too picky?

Thanks both.
Ezequiel.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-janitors" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html


[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Development]     [Kernel Announce]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Linux Networking Development]     [Share Photos]     [IDE]     [Security]     [Git]     [Netfilter]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Device Mapper]

  Powered by Linux