On Wed, 2 Jul 2008 16:36:36 +0300, Viktor Rosendahl
<viktor.rosendahl@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> req is an automatic variable and thus we cannot rely on it being
> initialized to
> zero (I am leaving the 0!= NULL discussion aside). Other functions test
> if this pointer is NULL, in order to determine whether it is a valid
> address or
> not.
> + req.func_cb = NULL;
maybe below is a better patch:
diff --git a/drivers/i2c/chips/twl4030-madc.c
b/drivers/i2c/chips/twl4030-madc.c
index 72b126b..6d8915e 100644
--- a/drivers/i2c/chips/twl4030-madc.c
+++ b/drivers/i2c/chips/twl4030-madc.c
@@ -360,7 +360,7 @@ static int twl4030_madc_ioctl(struct inode *inode,
struct file *filp,
switch (cmd) {
case TWL4030_MADC_IOCX_ADC_RAW_READ: {
- struct twl4030_madc_request req;
+ static struct twl4030_madc_request req;
if (par.channel >= TWL4030_MADC_MAX_CHANNELS)
return -EINVAL;
--
Best Regards,
Felipe Balbi
http://blog.felipebalbi.com
me@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
