Alexander E. Patrakov wrote: > __iomem removal is not questionable at all. This macro indicates that > this is not a valid pointer that you can dereference directly, but a > cookie that you can pass to the ioremap() in-kernel function in order to > access the hardware via the MMIO mechanism. This is always defined to > the empty value and used only by checkers like Coverity.
Agreed. And Sparse. Jim, looking better with the rationales. Thanks. You might want to include this link for __iomem removal rationale: http://lwn.net/Articles/102232/ Also, this line in your script appears wrong: -e 's/(s8/(__su8/g' \ Regards Greg -- http://www.diy-linux.org/ -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
