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 inclined to help if you provide the code
and the warning. Stating what research you've already done is helpful
as well.
> Is it necessary to inform in the cover letter or the patch itself
> stating that these warnings should be neglected ?
Assuming you've read [1] and [2] and it is indeed a valid use of
volatile, I would put it in the comment area of the patch email, eg:
---
Notes:
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.
diff...
hth,
Jason.
[1]
http://www.mjmwired.net/kernel/Documentation/volatile-considered-harmful.txt
[2] http://catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
_______________________________________________
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
