On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 04:50, David Miller <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > From: Daniel Hellstrom <daniel@xxxxxxxxxxx> > Date: Tue, 04 Jan 2011 15:42:45 +0100 > >> David Miller wrote: >> >>>From: Julian Calaby <jcalaby@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>>Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2010 14:55:50 +1100 >>> >>> >>>>Signed-off-by: Julian Calaby <julian.calaby@xxxxxxxxx> >>>> >>> >>>Applied. >>> >> >> I think this patch breaks the backwards compatability... > > Backwards compatability for who? There is one and only one caller > of this function, and it is marked static and not exported to any > other piece of code in the tree. The other point is that sparc64's version works like this, so why should sparc32's version be different? -- Julian Calaby Email: julian.calaby@xxxxxxxxx Profile: http://www.google.com/profiles/julian.calaby/ .Plan: http://sites.google.com/site/juliancalaby/ -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe sparclinux" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
