Re: [PATCH] Function / prototype mismatch

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

To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Function / prototype mismatch
From: Ralf Baechle <ralf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2004 14:25:09 +0100
Cc: Thomas Koeller <thomas.koeller@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, linux-mips@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20041109125912.GA6222@lst.de>
Original-recipient: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org
References: <200411091328.42360.thomas.koeller@baslerweb.com> <20041109124547.GA5766@lst.de> <20041109125418.GC5652@linux-mips.org> <20041109125912.GA6222@lst.de>
Sender: linux-mips-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mutt/1.4.1i

On Tue, Nov 09, 2004 at 01:59:12PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:

> Well, 90% of it as __do_IRQ ;-)

Would seem natural to have the same prototype for both, wouldn't it?

  Ralf

References:
- [PATCH] Function / prototype mismatch
  - From: Thomas Koeller
- Re: [PATCH] Function / prototype mismatch
  - From: Christoph Hellwig
- Re: [PATCH] Function / prototype mismatch
  - From: Ralf Baechle
- Re: [PATCH] Function / prototype mismatch
  - From: Christoph Hellwig

Prev by Date: Re: Disabling lwc0 instruction
Next by Date: RE: Problems debugging multithreaded program wirh gdbserver via ser ial port
Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH] Function / prototype mismatch
Next by thread: Re: [PATCH] Function / prototype mismatch
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

[Index of Archives] [Linux MIPS Home] [LKML Archive] [Linux ARM Kernel] [Linux ARM] [Linux] [Git] [Yosemite News] [Linux SCSI] [Linux Hams]

Powered by Linux