Hi Scott,
On 07/10/2012 11:36 PM, Scott Wood wrote:
> On 07/10/2012 08:00 AM, Zhong Hongbo wrote:
>> On 07/10/2012 08:29 PM, Zhong Hongbo wrote:
>>> On 07/10/2012 06:19 AM, Scott Wood wrote:
>>>> On 07/07/2012 04:57 AM, Zhong Hongbo wrote:
>>>>> @@ -89,15 +96,16 @@ static void s3c_nand_select_chip(struct mtd_info
>>>>> *mtd, int chip)
>>>>> */
>>>>> static void s3c_nand_hwcontrol(struct mtd_info *mtd, int cmd, unsigned
>>>>> int ctrl)
>>>>> {
>>>>> + struct s3c64xx_nand *const nand = s3c_get_base_nand();
>>>>
>>>> Is there any benefit to declaring local variables const like this?
>>>
>>> I reference the nand driver of S5PXX CPU. So ...
>> Sorry, I make a mistake, The S5PXX have not nand flash support. When i
>> do the patch, I use the format as following：
>>
>> struct s3c64xx_nand *nand = s3c_get_base_nand();
>>
>> But when I use checkpatch.pl script to check the patch. more and more
>> waring about the line, it said that you should add 'const' before nand
>> variable.
>
> Could you paste the exact output from checkpatch.pl?
Just redo the patch, I can not reproduce the issue. Thank you for your
point.
Thanks,
hongbo
>
> -Scott
>
>
>
_______________________________________________
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
