Dear Scott, In message <20090728225244.ga8...@b07421-ec1.am.freescale.net> you wrote: > > The patch title is bad -- it's not disabling warnings, it's disabling an > aspect of C99 that the code is incompatible with (and which is pretty > questionable in the first place with such low level code). Note that in > Linux, this is disabled for the entire kernel.
I know. But Linux is bigger than U-Boot, and I think we should be able to fix the few isolated places that throw such warnings. > As things stand, GCC may do bad things with that code. With this patch, > it may not (at least not this particular sort of bad thing). Those bad > things are not limited to the places where it warns -- those are just the > violations it detected. Agreed, and that's why I want to see this fixed. > Do you have an alternative malloc implementation in mind that is designed > to work with strict aliasing, or a suggested fix to the current one? I did not look into this yet - there was some discussion about a malloc replacement, but it faded away without visible result. I cannot do everything myself, but I can oppose changes that are IMO to the worse. Best regards, Wolfgang Denk -- DENX Software Engineering GmbH, MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: w...@denx.de I express preference for a chronological sequence of events which precludes a violence. - Terry Pratchett, _The Dark Side of the Sun_ _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot