From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andi Kleen Subject: Re: Why is AHA152X_CS !64BIT? Date: Wed, 8 Sep 2010 08:05:57 +0200 Message-ID: <20100908080557.511d307b@basil.nowhere.org> References: <4C72D310.4040004@suse.cz> <4C7B924D.6030703@panasas.com> <201009071712.54867.konrad@darnok.org> <4C86B1A4.8030308@oracle.com> <4C86B320.8090709@oracle.com> <4C86B860.1070105@suse.cz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from one.firstfloor.org ([213.235.205.2]:40030 "EHLO one.firstfloor.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757147Ab0IHGGD (ORCPT ); Wed, 8 Sep 2010 02:06:03 -0400 In-Reply-To: <4C86B860.1070105@suse.cz> Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org To: Jiri Slaby Cc: Randy Dunlap , Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk , Boaz Harrosh , fischer@linux-buechse.de, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org > > Hmm, the changelog says: > The warning I saw was actually for the PCMCIA aha152x driver. > > which I think are compiler warnings. But I see only one emitted by the > compiler and it is in a debug print. Don't remember the exact warning, but I was rather trigger happy on getting rid of all these ancient unmaintained drivers on 64bit back then. In hindsight it was the right thing to do -- their userbase seems to be near zero and there were little to no complains about it ever. -Andi -- ak@linux.intel.com -- Speaking for myself only.