Re: shouldn't "irq" be module_param_array instead of module_param in scsi/gdth.c ?

["Randy.Dunlap" <rddunlap@osdl.org>]

Jesper Juhl wrote:
> This little warning made me take a closer look : 
> drivers/scsi/gdth.c:645: warning: return from incompatible pointer type
> 
> And line 645 looks like this :
> 
> module_param(irq, int, 0);
> 
> looking a bit up in the file I find :
> 
> /* IRQ list for GDT3000/3020 EISA controllers */
> static int irq[MAXHA] __initdata =
> {0xff,0xff,0xff,0xff,0xff,0xff,0xff,0xff,
>  0xff,0xff,0xff,0xff,0xff,0xff,0xff,0xff};
> 
> That certainly looks like an array to me, so I'm wondering if something 
> like this patch would be correct?  I'm not familliar enough with 
> module_param* to be completely confident, but this silences the warning.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jesper Juhl <juhl-lkml@dif.dk>
> 
> --- linux-2.6.11-rc2-bk7-orig/drivers/scsi/gdth.c	2005-01-22 21:59:46.000000000 +0100
> +++ linux-2.6.11-rc2-bk7/drivers/scsi/gdth.c	2005-01-30 16:52:45.000000000 +0100
> @@ -642,7 +642,7 @@ static int probe_eisa_isa = 0;
>  static int force_dma32 = 0;
>  
>  /* parameters for modprobe/insmod */
> -module_param(irq, int, 0);
> +module_param_array(irq, int, NULL, 0);
>  module_param(disable, int, 0);
>  module_param(reserve_mode, int, 0);
>  module_param_array(reserve_list, int, NULL, 0);

Yep, same as:
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-scsi&m=110540330511653&w=2

-- 
~Randy