On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 11:44:21AM -0700, K. Y. Srinivasan wrote:
> Fix  checkpatch warnings in hv.c
> 
> Signed-off-by: K. Y. Srinivasan <[email protected]>
> Signed-off-by: Haiyang Zhang <[email protected]>
> ---
>  drivers/staging/hv/hv.c |    4 ++--
>  1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/hv/hv.c b/drivers/staging/hv/hv.c
> index e733173..14e6315 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/hv/hv.c
> +++ b/drivers/staging/hv/hv.c
> @@ -111,7 +111,7 @@ static u64 do_hypercall(u64 control, void *input, void 
> *output)
>       u64 hv_status = 0;
>       u64 input_address = (input) ? virt_to_phys(input) : 0;
>       u64 output_address = (output) ? virt_to_phys(output) : 0;
> -     volatile void *hypercall_page = hv_context.hypercall_page;
> +     void *hypercall_page = hv_context.hypercall_page;

Are you sure?  This was just someone being foolish?  No other reason
someone tried to use volatile here?

greg k-h
_______________________________________________
Virtualization mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization

Reply via email to