Re: Re[2]: empty_zero_page definition clash in 2.0.36

1999-01-28 Thread MOLNAR Ingo
On Thu, 28 Jan 1999, Evgeny Stambulchik wrote: > > (just pedantic, but the right fix is to make it (char *) not (unsigned > > char *), because this is how it was defined and used previously. > > Hmm, I also used signed at the beginning, but then looked into 2.2.0 sources and > there it's unsi

Re[2]: empty_zero_page definition clash in 2.0.36

1999-01-28 Thread Evgeny Stambulchik
MOLNAR Ingo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > -#define PARAM empty_zero_page > > +#define PARAM ((unsigned char *)empty_zero_page) > > (just pedantic, but the right fix is to make it (char *) not (unsigned > char *), because this is how it was defined and used previously. Hmm, I also used s

Re: empty_zero_page definition clash in 2.0.36

1999-01-28 Thread MOLNAR Ingo
On Thu, 28 Jan 1999, Evgeny Stambulchik wrote: > Usually, asm/pgtable.h is not sourced in setup.c, but with the latest raid > patch, AND if compiled for SMP, it is. Here is a fix (non-Intel archs may need > something similar, too): this is already fixed in the 19980128 RAID patch. (this should

empty_zero_page definition clash in 2.0.36

1999-01-28 Thread Evgeny Stambulchik
Hello, linux/arch/i386/kernel/setup.c defines extern char empty_zero_page[PAGE_SIZE]; whereas in include/asm-i386/pgtable.h we see: extern unsigned long empty_zero_page[1024]; Usually, asm/pgtable.h is not sourced in setup.c, but with the latest raid patch, AND if compiled for SMP, it is. He