On Mon, 25 Apr 2016, Eric Engestrom wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 10:12:16AM -0400, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> > Beware.
> >
> > I added many of those exactly because gcc did not ignore them when
> > compiling with LTO where the lack of a const qualifier to qualify the
> > actual array content,
Eric Engestrom writes:
> I can't confirm it (haven't tried), and don't care enough to do it :]
> I guess I'm just dropping the patch then. Like I said, it can't hurt to
> leave them in.
Actually it may hurt (a little bit) - it makes the code less readable.
--
Krzysztof Halasa
Industrial Resear
On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 10:12:16AM -0400, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> Beware.
>
> I added many of those exactly because gcc did not ignore them when
> compiling with LTO where the lack of a const qualifier to qualify the
> actual array content, and not only the reference to that content,
> generated
On Mon, 25 Apr 2016, Eric Engestrom wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 01:38:18PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > Maybe say you you found it (llvm, sparse, coccinelle?), and why this
> > is causing a problem for anyone. If it's just unnecessary but not
> > harmful, I'd probably ignore the patch.
>
On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 01:38:18PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> Maybe say you you found it (llvm, sparse, coccinelle?), and why this
> is causing a problem for anyone. If it's just unnecessary but not
> harmful, I'd probably ignore the patch.
$ grep -rE '(^|\W)const(\s+\w+)+\s+const\s'
I just ha
On Monday 25 April 2016 11:39:11 Eric Engestrom wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 11:57:15AM +0200, Alexandre Belloni wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > this requires a commit message.
>
> OK? This seems rather pointless in this case (and even more so for the
> typo fix I sent yesterday), but I guess you have
Hi Eric,
On Mon, 2016-04-25 at 11:57 +0200, Alexandre Belloni wrote:
> Hi,
>
> this requires a commit message.
>
> Also, you should think about separating those changes in multiple patches
> to ease inclusion in the kernel.
>
> On 25/04/2016 at 10:47:57 +0100, Eric Engestrom wrote :
> > Signed-
On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 11:57:15AM +0200, Alexandre Belloni wrote:
> Hi,
>
> this requires a commit message.
OK? This seems rather pointless in this case (and even more so for the
typo fix I sent yesterday), but I guess you have some general rule to
enforce. Would this do then?
"The second `const
Hi,
this requires a commit message.
Also, you should think about separating those changes in multiple patches
to ease inclusion in the kernel.
On 25/04/2016 at 10:47:57 +0100, Eric Engestrom wrote :
> Signed-off-by: Eric Engestrom
> ---
> arch/arm/mach-at91/pm.c | 2 +-
> arch/
On 25-04-16, 10:47, Eric Engestrom wrote:
> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-spear/time.c b/arch/arm/mach-spear/time.c
> index 9ccffc1..678 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/mach-spear/time.c
> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-spear/time.c
> @@ -204,7 +204,7 @@ static void __init spear_clockevent_init(int irq)
> setu
10 matches
Mail list logo
