Re: [RFC,PATCH 0/8] RDMA Transport Provider

["J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org>]

On Fri, Nov 30, 2007 at 09:59:28AM -0600, Tom Tucker wrote:
>=20
> On Thu, 2007-11-29 at 23:45 -0500, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 29, 2007 at 04:44:12PM -0600, Tom Tucker wrote:
> > > This patchset implements the RDMA Transport Driver for the=20
> [...snip...]
>=20
> I resent the two offending patches with fixes as required.

Thanks!  Applied and pushed out.

>=20
> > I still need the following to get it to compile.  Also, I'm getting
> > these warnings:
> >=20
> > net/sunrpc/svc_rdma_transport.c: In function =E2=80=98dto_tasklet_f=
unc=E2=80=99:
> > net/sunrpc/svc_rdma_transport.c:232: warning: passing argument 2 of=
 =E2=80=98test_and_clear_bit=E2=80=99 from incompatible pointer type
> > net/sunrpc/svc_rdma_transport.c:241: warning: passing argument 2 of=
 =E2=80=98constant_test_bit=E2=80=99 from incompatible pointer type
> > net/sunrpc/svc_rdma_transport.c:241: warning: passing argument 2 of=
 =E2=80=98variable_test_bit=E2=80=99 from incompatible pointer type
> > net/sunrpc/svc_rdma_transport.c:245: warning: passing argument 2 of=
 =E2=80=98test_and_clear_bit=E2=80=99 from incompatible pointer type
> > net/sunrpc/svc_rdma_transport.c: In function =E2=80=98rq_comp_handl=
er=E2=80=99:
> > net/sunrpc/svc_rdma_transport.c:271: warning: passing argument 2 of=
 =E2=80=98set_bit=E2=80=99 from incompatible pointer type
> > net/sunrpc/svc_rdma_transport.c: In function =E2=80=98sq_comp_handl=
er=E2=80=99:
> > net/sunrpc/svc_rdma_transport.c:382: warning: passing argument 2 of=
 =E2=80=98set_bit=E2=80=99 from incompatible pointer type
> > net/sunrpc/svc_rdma_transport.c: In function =E2=80=98rdma_cma_hand=
ler=E2=80=99:
> > net/sunrpc/svc_rdma_transport.c:617: warning: passing argument 2 of=
 =E2=80=98clear_bit=E2=80=99 from incompatible pointer type
> > net/sunrpc/svc_rdma_transport.c: In function =E2=80=98svc_rdma_acce=
pt=E2=80=99:
> > net/sunrpc/svc_rdma_transport.c:848: warning: passing argument 2 of=
 =E2=80=98set_bit=E2=80=99 from incompatible pointer type
> >=20
>=20
> I'm mystified as to why I didn't get these warnings. I built on a 64 =
bit
> machine. It seems like that would give the warning since unsigned lon=
g
> isn't even the same size as int.

Yeah, I can't see how any compiler could miss that.  How do you usually
build?

--b.