On Mon, Feb 13, 2017 at 12:26 AM, Thomas Gleixner <t...@linutronix.de> wrote: > On Sun, 12 Feb 2017, Bhumika Goyal wrote: > >> On Sun, Feb 12, 2017 at 2:01 AM, Ard Biesheuvel >> <ard.biesheu...@linaro.org> wrote: >> > On 11 February 2017 at 19:20, Bhumika Goyal <bhumi...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> The object cyclecounter of type cyclecounter is not getting modified >> >> after getting initialized by arch_counter_register. Apart from >> >> initialization in arch_counter_register it is also passed as an argument >> >> to the function timecounter_init but this argument is of type const. >> >> Therefore, add __ro_after_init to its declaration. >> >> >> > >> > I think adding __ro_after_init is fine if this struct is never >> > modified after init. But the reference in the commit log to the >> > constness of the timecounter_init() argument makes no sense: that >> > only means timecounter_init() will not modify the object, which allows >> > pointers to const objects to be passed to it as well. The opposite is >> > not true, though: there is no requirement whatsoever that objects >> > passed into const pointer arguments should be const themselves. >> > >> > >> >> Yes, true. I will change the commit log and send a v2. Thanks for explaining. > > I've applied it already and fixed up the subject/changelog. You should have > mail from tip-bot ...
Okay. Thanks. I thought the patch is not applied yet because I haven't received a mail from tip-bot yet. Thanks, Bhumika