Re: [U-Boot] Checkpatch warnings for "volatile"

2011-10-15 Thread Marek Vasut
On Saturday, October 15, 2011 10:56:54 AM Wolfgang Denk wrote: > Dear Prabhakar Lad, > > In message you wrote: > > > I've explained this a number of times recently - there are actually > > > very, very few occasions where "volatile" actually makes sense. > > > > > > Agreed, but I see a piec

Re: [U-Boot] Checkpatch warnings for "volatile"

2011-10-15 Thread Prabhakar Lad
Hi Wolfgang On 10/15/11, Wolfgang Denk wrote: > Dear Prabhakar Lad, > > In message > you > wrote: >> >> > I've explained this a number of times recently - there are actually >> > very, very few occasions where "volatile" actually makes sense. >> > >> > Agreed, but I see a piece of code wher

Re: [U-Boot] Checkpatch warnings for "volatile"

2011-10-15 Thread Wolfgang Denk
Dear Prabhakar Lad, In message you wrote: > > > I've explained this a number of times recently - there are actually > > very, very few occasions where "volatile" actually makes sense. > > > > Agreed, but I see a piece of code where virtual address are compared. > For example in arch/a

Re: [U-Boot] Checkpatch warnings for "volatile"

2011-10-14 Thread Prabhakar Lad
Hi Wolfgang, On Sat, Oct 15, 2011 at 2:54 AM, Wolfgang Denk wrote: > Dear Jason, > > In message <20111014202224.gi7...@titan.lakedaemon.net> you wrote: > > > > > > 1.) checkpatch.pl complained about volatile in source.c:312. This > is > > > >a register we bitbang in a loop and we don'

Re: [U-Boot] Checkpatch warnings for "volatile"

2011-10-14 Thread Wolfgang Denk
Dear Jason, In message <20111014202224.gi7...@titan.lakedaemon.net> you wrote: > > > > 1.) checkpatch.pl complained about volatile in source.c:312. This is > > >a register we bitbang in a loop and we don't want the compiler > > >optimizing it out. > > > > This would, in almost

Re: [U-Boot] Checkpatch warnings for "volatile"

2011-10-14 Thread Jason
Wolfgang, On Fri, Oct 14, 2011 at 09:58:44PM +0200, Wolfgang Denk wrote: > Dear Jason, > > In message <20111014131245.gf7...@titan.lakedaemon.net> you wrote: > > > > 1.) checkpatch.pl complained about volatile in source.c:312. This is > >a register we bitbang in a loop and we don't

Re: [U-Boot] Checkpatch warnings for "volatile"

2011-10-14 Thread Wolfgang Denk
Dear Jason, In message <20111014131245.gf7...@titan.lakedaemon.net> you wrote: > > 1.) checkpatch.pl complained about volatile in source.c:312. This is >a register we bitbang in a loop and we don't want the compiler >optimizing it out. This would, in almost all cases, trig

Re: [U-Boot] Checkpatch warnings for "volatile"

2011-10-14 Thread Jason
Prabhakar, On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 04:05:57PM +0530, Prabhakar Lad wrote: > The checkpatch complains for volatile keyword, Just to make sure [1], since there is a lot of misunderstanding regarding volatile. > if "volatile" is necessary and cannot be removed, Please see [2], people are more inc

Re: [U-Boot] Checkpatch warnings for "volatile"

2011-10-14 Thread Prabhakar Lad
any one? Regards --Prabhakar Lad On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 4:05 PM, Prabhakar Lad wrote: > Hi Wolfgang, > > The checkpatch complains for volatile keyword, if "volatile" is necessary > and cannot be removed, > Is it necessary to inform in the cover letter or the patch itself stating > that these

[U-Boot] Checkpatch warnings for "volatile"

2011-10-12 Thread Prabhakar Lad
Hi Wolfgang, The checkpatch complains for volatile keyword, if "volatile" is necessary and cannot be removed, Is it necessary to inform in the cover letter or the patch itself stating that these warnings should be neglected ? Regards --Prabhakar Lad _