From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tejun Heo Subject: Re: [PATCH v2]ata:ahci.c Fix warning: comparison between 'enum ' and 'enum ' Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2010 09:11:38 +0200 Message-ID: <4C2AEE2A.8060405@kernel.org> References: <1277879827-18233-1-git-send-email-justinmattock@gmail.com> <4C2AE8FE.3020409@kernel.org> <4C2AED03.7070103@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from hera.kernel.org ([140.211.167.34]:38275 "EHLO hera.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752398Ab0F3HMH (ORCPT ); Wed, 30 Jun 2010 03:12:07 -0400 In-Reply-To: <4C2AED03.7070103@gmail.com> Sender: linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org To: "Justin P. Mattock" Cc: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org, jgarzik@pobox.com On 06/30/2010 09:06 AM, Justin P. Mattock wrote: >> Hmm, is this something we wanna go around the kernel and updating >> sources? Or should we just flick a gcc option? > > the flick a gcc option seems easier todo, but my guess its probably not > the right way of dealing with the issue(even a warning). What does the extra warning buy us? There are several places which use anonymous enums for constants and I can't see what the benefit of this warning would be. >> And, just do WARN_ON((int)ATA_MAX_QUEUE > (int)AHCI_MAX_CMDS) > > that builds clean. keep in mind I just compile tested, no rebooting or > anything. Should I just resend with what you posted, and call it that, > or is this something that needs more? I think it would be better to first decide what to do about the new warnings. Thanks. -- tejun