On 10/01/2013 09:03 PM, Wolfram Sang wrote:
Yup. But I just remembered a better solution:
From: Wolfram Sang w...@the-dreams.de Subject: [PATCH] ppc:
mpc52xx: silence false positive from old GCC
So people can compile with -Werror.
Signed-off-by: Wolfram Sang w...@the-dreams.de ---
This reverts commit 6391f697d4892a6f233501beea553e13f7745a23. The
compiler warning it wants to fix does not appear with my gcc 4.6.2. IMO
we don't need superfluous (and here even misleading) code to make old
compilers happy. Fixing the printout was bogus, too. We want to know
WHICH critical irq
On 10/01/2013 09:26 AM, Wolfram Sang wrote:
This reverts commit 6391f697d4892a6f233501beea553e13f7745a23. The
compiler warning it wants to fix does not appear with my gcc 4.6.2. IMO
we don't need superfluous (and here even misleading) code to make old
compilers happy. Fixing the printout was
Hi,
On Tue, Oct 01, 2013 at 09:54:51AM +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
On 10/01/2013 09:26 AM, Wolfram Sang wrote:
This reverts commit 6391f697d4892a6f233501beea553e13f7745a23. The
compiler warning it wants to fix does not appear with my gcc 4.6.2. IMO
we don't need superfluous
On 10/01/2013 11:11 AM, Wolfram Sang wrote:
Hi,
Hi Wolfram,
Well, if you insist, I'd prefer the following patch.
From: Wolfram Sang w...@the-dreams.de Subject: [PATCH] ppc:
mpc52xx: silence false positive from old GCC
So people can compile with -Werror (RT patchset).
Why do you mention
So people can compile with -Werror (RT patchset).
Why do you mention the RT patch set here? Doesn't the vanila tree gets
compiled with -Werror as well?
Not for me.
irq_chip *irqchip = NULL; /* pet old compilers */
That would probably work, too. I would drop that comment but then
