Hi Laurent just one question: On Mon, 19 Sep 2011, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > > diff --git a/drivers/media/video/mt9m032.c b/drivers/media/video/mt9m032.c > > new file mode 100644 > > index 0000000..8a64193 > > --- /dev/null > > +++ b/drivers/media/video/mt9m032.c > > @@ -0,0 +1,814 @@ [snip] > > +static int mt9m032_read_reg(struct mt9m032 *sensor, const u8 reg) > > No need for the const keyword, this isn't a pointer :-) I was actually wondering about these: of course it's not the same as using const for a pointer to tell the compiler, that this function will not change caller's data. But - doesn't using const for any local variable tell the compiler, that that _variable_ will not be modified in this function? Are there no optimisation possibilities, arising from that? Thanks Guennadi --- Guennadi Liakhovetski, Ph.D. Freelance Open-Source Software Developer http://www.open-technology.de/ -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-media" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
