RE: [PATCH 2.6] cciss typo fix

[Miller, Mike (OS Dev)]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: James Bottomley [mailto:James.Bottomley@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
> 
> 
> On Fri, 2005-01-07 at 17:01 -0600, mike.miller@xxxxxx wrote:
> > -		*total_size = be32_to_cpu(*((__be32 *) 
> &buf->total_size[0]))+1;
> > -		*block_size = be32_to_cpu(*((__be32 *) 
> &buf->block_size[0]));
> > +		*total_size = be32_to_cpu(*((__u32 *) 
> &buf->total_size[0]))+1;
> > +		*block_size = be32_to_cpu(*((__u32 *) 
> &buf->block_size[0]));
> 
> I don't think that's a typo.  It was introduced by this patch:
> 
> ChangeSet 1.1988.24.79 2004/10/06 07:55:02 viro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>   [PATCH] cciss endianness and iomem annotations
>  
> The idea being that BE and LE numbers should be annotated differently,
> so the __be32 annotations look correct to me.  I think sparse 
> will warn
> if you make this change.

Hmmm, SuSE complained that __be32 was not defined in the kernel. Any other thoughts, anyone?

mikem
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/