On Sunday 30 October 2011 19:45:43 Marek Vasut wrote:
> > On Sunday 30 October 2011 16:48:50 Marek Vasut wrote:
> > > > On Tuesday 25 October 2011 05:39:58 Marek Vasut wrote:
> > > > > --- a/drivers/usb/eth/smsc95xx.c
> > > > > +++ b/drivers/usb/eth/smsc95xx.c
> > > > > 
> > > > > -     addr_lo = cpu_to_le32(*((u32 *)eth->enetaddr));
> > > > > +     addr_lo = cpu_to_le32(*eth->enetaddr);
> > > > 
> > > > pretty sure this is wrong.  enetaddr is a uchar[], so your code now
> > > > reads only 1 byte instead of 4.
> > > > 
> > > > that said, this code also seems to not be endian safe ...
> > > 
> > > It's good anyone actually cares to properly review. Anyway, why does
> > > noone actually care to fix all the damn warnings in their drivers
> > > before submitting them in the first place ?!
> > 
> > the strict alias warnings you are hitting show up only in newer
> > compilers. so i'm sure at the time of their development/submission, they
> > didn't exist.
> 
> This is a different driver than that armada100_fec.c.

ok ?  the original 12/18 patch said:
smsc95xx.c: In function 'smsc95xx_write_hwaddr':
smsc95xx.c:380:2: warning: dereferencing type-punned pointer will break
strict-aliasing rules
-mike

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

_______________________________________________
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot

Reply via email to