[PATCH] cramfs: Error message about endianess

o the list, so please CC me for any comments. Tested on an i386 box. Diffed against Linus' git-tree. Signed-off-by: Andi Drebes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> --- diff --git a/fs/cramfs/inode.c b/fs/cramfs/inode.c index 3d194a2..34c9b91 100644 --- a/fs/cramfs/inode.c +++ b/fs/cramfs/inode.c @@ -

Re: [PATCH] drivers/isdn/hisax: ARRAY_SIZE instead of sizeof

of the files should decide wether they want to keep it or not. Tested by compilation on an i386 box using "allyesconfig". Diffed against Linus' git-tree. Signed-off-by: Andi Drebes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> --- diff --git a/drivers/isdn/hisax/callc.c b/drivers/isdn/hisax/callc.c index

Re: [KJ] Re: [PATCH] drivers/isdn/hisax: ARRAY_SIZE instead of sizeof

> I think what was meant here was to remove _all_ the macros that you > assigned to the ARRAY_SIZE() macro. Yes, absolutely. I overlooked the 'eg.' in Jan-Benedict's post. Sorry for that. > If you look at the two advantages replacing code with the ARRAY_SIZE() > macro has; > 1. More readable/cons

Re: [KJ] Re: [PATCH] drivers/isdn/hisax: ARRAY_SIZE instead of sizeof

> Agree, here is a new version. > > This patch replaces various array size calculations in drivers/isdn/hisax > done using sizeof with the ARRAY_SIZE macro. Thanks for the work Karsten. Andi - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a messag

Re: [KJ] [PATCH] drivers/acpi: sizeof/sizeof array size calculations replaced with ARRAY_SIZE

First off: sorry for my late answer. > I agree the ACPI CA is a nuisance. But in this case, we're making > a mountain out of a molehill. I suspect that if somebody spent the > 15 minutes to make the ARRAY_SIZE patch work in both the Linux ACPI CA > and the generic Intel one and license it approp

Re: [KJ] [PATCH] drivers/acpi: sizeof/sizeof array size calculations replaced with ARRAY_SIZE

> You found the right one. The ACPI CA in Linux is really the same > as the one from Intel. Len integrates the Intel one into Linux > periodically. He uses scripts or something to format it so it looks > more like Linux. Ok. That's what I thought so far. > I think Len sometimes takes patches a

Re: [KJ] [PATCH] drivers/acpi: sizeof/sizeof array size calculations replaced with ARRAY_SIZE

and the newly added definition for ARRAY_SIZE breaks this consistency in some way. Perhaps Len could give me a hint where to put it. Ok, here's the new patch: Diffed against the intel acpica implementation "acpica-unix-20061109". Tested by compilation. Signed-off-by: Andi Drebes &

[PATCH] drivers/isdn/hisax: ARRAY_SIZE instead of sizeof

7; git-tree. Signed-off-by: Andi Drebes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> --- diff --git a/drivers/isdn/hisax/callc.c b/drivers/isdn/hisax/callc.c index 7c56c44..50b98d5 100644 --- a/drivers/isdn/hisax/callc.c +++ b/drivers/isdn/hisax/callc.c @@ -834,7 +834,7 @@ static struct FsmNode fnlist[] __ini

Re: Ideas on column length in kernel "problem"?

> Many free (and not-free) mail clients wordwrap. Hushmail wraps at > 68 (verified), Yahoo has options to wrap at a max of 99, and Gmail > was somewhere around 85-90 as I recall. Not sure on other free / > inexpensive clients. It happens so often that people send mangled patches that it migh