Michael Ellerman <mich...@ellerman.id.au> wrote: > On Wed, 2009-04-08 at 15:51 +1000, Tony Breeds wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 08, 2009 at 03:08:55PM +1000, Michael Ellerman wrote: > > > > > The getter routines in here could really multiplex their return values > > > with a negative error code, which I generally prefer, but this works I > > > guess. > > > > I was hoping someone would notice and suggest it. tag you're it! > > I meant we /could/ change them, but we could also leave them, it's a bit > of a coin-flip which is better. Nathan might have an opinion?
I think I had some reason for doing it this way, but I'm drawing a blank right now. In the meantime, can someone post the warnings that gcc emits for cacheinfo.c, as well as the gcc version? I can't reproduce them with 4.3.2 on Fedora. _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev