From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Patrick McHardy Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] Netfilter: Accounting rework: ct_extend + 64bit counters (v3) Date: Wed, 02 Jul 2008 16:02:20 +0200 Message-ID: <486B8A6C.9040502@trash.net> References: <485a3c49.C0A/tC0/U7AaZp3V%ole@ans.pl> <486114E9.9000809@trash.net> <486B7D9C.4070501@trash.net> <486B80F5.7050801@trash.net> <486B853A.205@trash.net> <486B87FE.90909@trash.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Krzysztof Oledzki , netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org To: Jan Engelhardt Return-path: Received: from stinky.trash.net ([213.144.137.162]:38678 "EHLO stinky.trash.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752965AbYGBOCW (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 Jul 2008 10:02:22 -0400 In-Reply-To: Sender: netfilter-devel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Jan Engelhardt wrote: > On Wednesday 2008-07-02 15:51, Patrick McHardy wrote: >>>> Seems you're the first to try module_param_named with a bool :) >>>> Does this help? >>> It helps but produces a lot of warnings in other places: >>> >>> kernel/printk.c: In function '__check_time': >>> kernel/printk.c:570: warning: return from incompatible pointer type >> Ah I see. You're supposed to use an int for the variable and >> bool only for module_param_named. > > Yes but since we have 'bool' type (though only since recently), > module_param_bool should also *take* a bool. It probably should, but module_param preceds the boolean type in the kernel, so it seems someone wasn't motivated enough to fix up all the users. And since this is not related to netfilter in any way, lets just use it how its supposed to.