+ /*
+ * Only need to copy the first 512 bytes from address 0. But since
+ * the compiler emits a warning if src == NULL for memcpy use
copy_page
+ * instead. Copies more than needed but this code is not
performance
+ * critical.
+ */
+ copy_page(lowcore, &S390_lowcore);
Boah, workaround alert. Why do you not fix the compiler?
We need to copy from address 0 (that's where the lowcore resides).
But gcc
insists to complain if memcpy is used with src == NULL.. Now what?
Erm sorry, misread your question. Usually it's a bug to use memcpy with
src == NULL. In this case it's ok. So I think it's perfectly ok if gcc
emits a warning.
If you know of a better way to get around this please let me know.
-ffreestanding or -Wno-nonnull?
Segher
--
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/
