Re: [PATCH] De-constify sched.h

2007-10-26 Thread Ingo Molnar
* Alexey Dobriyan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Linus, please revert commit a8972ccf00b7184a743eb6cd9bc7f3443357910c aka > "sched: constify sched.h" or apply the following patch instead. > > [PATCH] De-constify sched.h firstly, thank you for not Cc:-ing me. I le

Re: [PATCH] De-constify sched.h

2007-10-26 Thread David Miller
From: David Rientjes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2007 02:42:30 -0700 (PDT) > On Fri, 26 Oct 2007, Alexey Dobriyan wrote: > > > 2) There is no such thing as const task_struct. Anyone who think otherwise > >deserves compiler warning. > > > > A 'const struct task_struct *' can be use

Re: [PATCH] De-constify sched.h

2007-10-26 Thread David Rientjes
On Fri, 26 Oct 2007, Alexey Dobriyan wrote: > 2) There is no such thing as const task_struct. Anyone who think otherwise >deserves compiler warning. > A 'const struct task_struct *' can be used as an annotation to mean that no member of the struct is modified through that pointer, so it's

[PATCH] De-constify sched.h

2007-10-26 Thread Alexey Dobriyan
Linus, please revert commit a8972ccf00b7184a743eb6cd9bc7f3443357910c aka "sched: constify sched.h" or apply the following patch instead. [PATCH] De-constify sched.h 1) Patch doesn't change any code here, so gcc is already smart enough to "feel" constness in such simp