On Mon, 11 Dec 2006, Michael Schmitz wrote:
> this isn't really my kettle of fish, but I post it anyway unless Petr
> complains :-)
> 
> This is what makes it possible for me to test 2.6 builds on the
> emulator...
> 
> Should be signed off by Petr, really.

Please post patches inline, to make it easier to comment on them.

> --- linux-2.6.19-m68k-cvs/arch/m68k/atari/natfeat.h   2006-12-08 
> 18:49:02.000000000 +0100
> +++ linux-2.6.19-m68k/arch/m68k/atari/natfeat.h       2006-12-08 
> 18:49:02.000000000 +0100

> +struct nf_ops
> +{
> +     long (*get_id)(const char *);
                       ^^^^^^^^^^^^
But you always pass `virt_to_phys(const char *)', which is actually an unsigned
long, causing compiler warnings.

What about moving the `virt_to_phys()' inside get_id()?

> +int nf_name(char *buf, int bufsize);
       ^^^^^^^
Shouldn't this be nf_name1? Or the other way around.

> --- linux-2.6.19-m68k-cvs/arch/m68k/atari/natfeat.c   2006-12-08 
> 18:49:02.000000000 +0100
> +++ linux-2.6.19-m68k/arch/m68k/atari/natfeat.c       2006-12-08 
> 18:49:02.000000000 +0100

> +static unsigned long nf_get_id_instr = 0x73004e75UL;
> +static unsigned long nf_call_instr = 0x73014e75UL;
> +
> +static struct nf_ops _nf_ops = { &nf_get_id_instr, &nf_call_instr }; 
                                    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Ugh, nice compiler warnings. What about using correct C prototypes with inline
assembler instead of these hardcoded unsigned longs?

Gr{oetje,eeting}s,

                                                Geert

--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]

In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
                                                            -- Linus Torvalds
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-m68k" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to