At Mon, 12 Mar 2007 15:46:47 +0000,
Ralf Baechle wrote:
>
> On Mon, Mar 12, 2007 at 03:43:10PM +0100, Takashi Iwai wrote:
>
> > Fair enough. I agree that removing const is the only reasonable fix
> > right now. But from semantics, const is a good thing, and people may
> > try to add it again later if we get rid of them now. So, how about to
> > comment out such as /*const*/ in each place to remind that it's
> > intentional?
>
> I consider that harder to read and uglier. If anything maybe something
> like:
>
> #define __const_devinit
> [...]
> static __const_devinit struct snd_kcontrol_new
> snd_ice1712_delta1010lt_wordclock_status __devinitdata =
>
> Worth it? I doubt.
Well that's really a taste of matter...
> > Also, in your patch to ice1712, you don't have to remove const from the
> > codes in snd_ice1712_read_eeprom() and snd_ice1712_probe() functions.
> > They should work as const pointer.
>
> No, that results in warnings:
>
> CC sound/pci/ice1712/ice1712.o
> sound/pci/ice1712/ice1712.c: In function ‘snd_ice1712_read_eeprom’:
> sound/pci/ice1712/ice1712.c:2354: warning: assignment from incompatible
> pointer type
> sound/pci/ice1712/ice1712.c: In function ‘snd_ice1712_probe’:
> sound/pci/ice1712/ice1712.c:2693: warning: assignment from incompatible
> pointer type
Ah, that's a nasty part of C const. It should be like
const struct snd_ice1712_card_info *c;
but for pointer-of-pointer, something like
struct snd_ice1712_card_info * const *tbl;
...?
Takashi
-
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/
