On Tue, 30 Oct 2007 21:08:46 -0700 (PDT) David Miller <[email protected]> wrote: > > I'm not so sure ifdef'ing things up all over the place is the way to > solve this. It makes the code ultra ugly. I agree. > I think we should retain the check, but modify it so that GCC knows we > understand that it's OK if it is always false. Perhaps a simple (u32) > cast on the left branch of the comparison is sufficient? Unfortunately, that does not suppress the warning (gcc is getting too smart :-(). -- Cheers, Stephen Rothwell [email protected] http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/
Attachment:
pgpP3GGWMYEat.pgp
Description: PGP signature
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: [PATCH] af_key: suppress a warning for 64k pages.
- From: David Miller <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH] af_key: suppress a warning for 64k pages.
- References:
- [PATCH] af_key: suppress a warning for 64k pages.
- From: Stephen Rothwell <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH] af_key: suppress a warning for 64k pages.
- From: David Miller <[email protected]>
- [PATCH] af_key: suppress a warning for 64k pages.
- Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH 00/33] Swap over NFS -v14
- Next by Date: Re: [PATCH 00/33] Swap over NFS -v14
- Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH] af_key: suppress a warning for 64k pages.
- Next by thread: Re: [PATCH] af_key: suppress a warning for 64k pages.
- Index(es):
 |