From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list linux-mips); Mon, 26 Sep 2016 17:29:40 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1]:58944 "EHLO linux-mips.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by eddie.linux-mips.org with ESMTP id S23991859AbcIZP3cqv1Js (ORCPT ); Mon, 26 Sep 2016 17:29:32 +0200 Received: from scotty.linux-mips.net (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by scotty.linux-mips.net (8.15.2/8.14.8) with ESMTP id u8QFTV3b012174; Mon, 26 Sep 2016 17:29:31 +0200 Received: (from ralf@localhost) by scotty.linux-mips.net (8.15.2/8.15.2/Submit) id u8QFTUBH012173; Mon, 26 Sep 2016 17:29:30 +0200 Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2016 17:29:30 +0200 From: Ralf Baechle To: James Hogan Cc: linux-mips@linux-mips.org Subject: Re: [mips-sjhill:mips-for-linux-next 58/62] arch/mips/kernel/uprobes.c:304:15: error: variable or field 'kstart' declared void Message-ID: <20160926152930.GE12981@linux-mips.org> References: <201609240204.arLAdO5Z%fengguang.wu@intel.com> <20160926102437.GB12981@linux-mips.org> <5302CFBF-1016-4704-B3AE-3BD986E5DD3B@imgtec.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <5302CFBF-1016-4704-B3AE-3BD986E5DD3B@imgtec.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.7.0 (2016-08-17) Return-Path: X-Envelope-To: <"|/home/ecartis/ecartis -s linux-mips"> (uid 0) X-Orcpt: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org Original-Recipient: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org X-archive-position: 55264 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org Errors-to: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org X-original-sender: ralf@linux-mips.org Precedence: bulk List-help: List-unsubscribe: List-software: Ecartis version 1.0.0 List-Id: linux-mips X-List-ID: linux-mips List-subscribe: List-owner: List-post: List-archive: X-list: linux-mips On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 02:07:03PM +0100, James Hogan wrote: > My intention was I think for kstart to be void * (and to use void * arithmetic), but i'm indifferent if you prefer unsigned long for that. Apparently my build coverage was lacking for this patch, sorry about that! Standard C doesn't allow arithmetic on void pointers; GCC does so as an extension over standard C - and I tend to avoid such extensions, if possible. I also tend to prefer unsigned long at a low level for things such as cache flush operations - but more importantly I try to keep the number of casts down. Ralf