From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from scsfmr002.sc.intel.com (fmr22.intel.com [143.183.121.14]) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E1F5F68A8A for ; Thu, 26 Jan 2006 07:03:19 +1100 (EST) Message-Id: <200601252002.k0PK2Mg31276@unix-os.sc.intel.com> From: "Chen, Kenneth W" To: "'Geert Uytterhoeven'" Subject: RE: [PATCH 5/6] fix warning on test_ti_thread_flag() Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 12:02:21 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" In-Reply-To: Cc: Akinobu Mita , linux-m68k@vger.kernel.org, linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org, ultralinux@vger.kernel.org, Linux Kernel Development , Andi Kleen , Linux/PPC Development , sparclinux@vger.kernel.org, linux390@de.ibm.com, linuxsh-dev@lists.sourceforge.net, parisc-linux@parisc-linux.org List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Geert Uytterhoeven wrote on Wednesday, January 25, 2006 9:19 AM > > I don't think you need to change the flags size. > > Passing a pointer to a 32-bit entity to a function that takes a > pointer to a 64-bit entity is a classical endianness bug. So it's > better to change it, before people copy the code to a big endian > platform. Well, x86-64 and linux-ia64 both use little endian. I don't understand why you are barking at us with big endian issue. - Ken Side-note: cc list trimmed.