On Sun, 2010-11-28 at 01:50 -0800, Joe Perches wrote: > On Sun, 2010-11-28 at 10:30 +0100, Johannes Berg wrote: > > On Sun, 2010-11-28 at 01:20 -0800, Joe Perches wrote: > > > On Sun, 2010-11-28 at 10:12 +0100, Johannes Berg wrote: > > > > On Sun, 2010-11-28 at 01:05 -0800, Joe Perches wrote: > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/zd1211rw/zd_chip.c b/drivers/net/wireless/zd1211rw/zd_chip.c > > > > > @@ -117,8 +117,7 @@ int zd_ioread32v_locked(struct zd_chip *chip, u32 *values, const zd_addr_t *addr > > > > > /* Allocate a single memory block for values and addresses. */ > > > > > count16 = 2*count; > > > > > - a16 = (zd_addr_t *) kmalloc(count16 * (sizeof(zd_addr_t) + sizeof(u16)), > > > > > - GFP_KERNEL); > > > > > + a16 = kmalloc(count16 * (sizeof(zd_addr_t) + sizeof(u16)), GFP_KERNEL); > > > > I believe this is on purpose for sparse. > > > Perhaps in a previous version, but not now. > > How do you know? I thought sparse was pretty much not reliable after the > > first error it prints. > > Good memory you have Johannes... > > http://marc.info/?l=linux-netdev&m=117113743902549&w=3 I, err, not really, all this isn't making a whole lot of sense to me right now :-) The only thing I remembered was that there was something weird with zd_addr_t ... Did sparse become more reliable in face of errors? johannes -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
