On Wed, Apr 06, 2016 at 12:01:17PM +0200, Stefan Weil wrote: > Am 06.04.2016 um 11:16 schrieb Edgar E. Iglesias: > > On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 08:31:33AM +0100, Stefan Weil wrote: > >> Making the opcode list 'const' saves memory. > >> Some function arguments and local variables needed 'const', too. > >> > >> Add also 'static' to two local functions. > > Hi Stefan, > > > > Sorry for the delays... > > > > I gave this a try but it fails for me: > > > > /home/edgar/src/c/qemu/qemu/disas/microblaze.c:668:1: error: conflicting > > types for ‘get_field_special’ > > get_field_special(long instr, const struct op_code_struct *op) > > ^ > > /home/edgar/src/c/qemu/qemu/disas/microblaze.c:599:8: note: previous > > declaration of ‘get_field_special’ was here > > char * get_field_special (long instr, struct op_code_struct * op); > > ^ > > /home/edgar/src/c/qemu/qemu/disas/microblaze.c:733:1: error: conflicting > > types for ‘read_insn_microblaze’ > > read_insn_microblaze (bfd_vma memaddr, > > ^ > > /home/edgar/src/c/qemu/qemu/disas/microblaze.c:600:15: note: previous > > declaration of ‘read_insn_microblaze’ was here > > unsigned long read_insn_microblaze (bfd_vma memaddr, > > ^ > > make: *** [disas/microblaze.o] Error 1 > > make: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs.... > > > > > > It looks like if you may have forgotten to update or remove the function > > prototypes... > > > > Best regards, > > Edgar > > > > Hello Edgar, > > you are right, I forgot to remove the two function prototypes. > They are not needed, so removing is the best solution which > I also used in most of my working trees. Obviously I had > chosen a bad tree for sending the patch, sorry for that. > > Should I send an update, or can you just remove the two > conflicting prototypes?
Hi Stefan, Nah, I've added a modified version of your patch into my mb-next branch. Thanks! Edgar