On Fri, Aug 31, 2007 at 02:53:23PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 30, 2007 at 10:55:49PM +0200, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
> > "those callers". There was _exactly one_ caller, and that was an out-of-tree
> > module. There were not any in-kernel callers before, and it did not generate
> > any warning. That is perhaps why no one had constified it before me. This does
> > not mean we should wait for a caller to pop up before constifying IMHO.
>
> In this case we should just kill it instead of messing with constness.
I think Jan mis-spoke -- there were no in-kernel callers calling it with
a const argument.
--
Intel are signing my paycheques ... these opinions are still mine
"Bill, look, we understand that you're interested in selling us this
operating system, but compare it to ours. We can't possibly take such
a retrograde step."
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
