James Bottomley wrote: > We really don't want gcc making assumptions about prototypes ... even if > it's getting them right in all likelihood (doubtless unprototyped > assumed functions will become a warning and then an error in later gcc > versions ...), so this is a better fix ACK. The fix works here. If you would be so kind, please push it upstream at your convenience. gcc-4.X violates the principle of least astonishment over even more nitnoid matters, but that's another flame for another day. -- ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Bob Tracy | "Eagles may soar, but weasels don't get rct@xxxxxxxx | sucked into jet engines." --Anon ----------------------------------------------------------------------- - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
