Warning when compiling arch/x86/mm/init_64.c on x86_64

Warning when compiling arch/x86/mm/init_64.c on x86_64

[Larry Finger]

Since commit 511631011d39706ac81ee5e4c9084d61e5b4fd34, entitled
"x86: fix pointer type warning in arch/x86/mm/init_64.c:early_memtest", the 
following warning is produced for x86_64:

arch/x86/mm/init_64.c: In function ‘early_memtest’:
arch/x86/mm/init_64.c:520: warning: passing argument 2 of 
‘find_e820_area_size’ from incompatible pointer type

Before this commit, the compilation of this routine on my system was clean. I 
use gcc version 4.2.1. Was this the warning for i386 before the patch? I 
tried simple changes in the definition of find_e820_area_size, but only 
managed to push the warning on to the call to bad_addr_size. At that point I 
decided to let the experts find a proper fix. Note that the warning does no 
harm - I just get nervous about incompatible pointer warnings as it usually 
means that I have screwed something up.

Larry

Re: Warning when compiling arch/x86/mm/init_64.c on x86_64

[Kevin Winchester]

Larry Finger wrote:
> Since commit 511631011d39706ac81ee5e4c9084d61e5b4fd34, entitled
> "x86: fix pointer type warning in arch/x86/mm/init_64.c:early_memtest", the 
> following warning is produced for x86_64:
> 
> arch/x86/mm/init_64.c: In function ‘early_memtest’:
> arch/x86/mm/init_64.c:520: warning: passing argument 2 of 
> ‘find_e820_area_size’ from incompatible pointer type
> 
> Before this commit, the compilation of this routine on my system was clean. I 
> use gcc version 4.2.1. Was this the warning for i386 before the patch? I 
> tried simple changes in the definition of find_e820_area_size, but only 
> managed to push the warning on to the call to bad_addr_size. At that point I 
> decided to let the experts find a proper fix. Note that the warning does no 
> harm - I just get nervous about incompatible pointer warnings as it usually 
> means that I have screwed something up.
> 

The patch was against linux-next, which seems to have changed 
find_e820_area_size() - against mainline it introduced the warning 
instead of fixing it.

-- 
Kevin Winchester