From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=56923 helo=eggs.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Q6jPT-0000fK-N6
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 04 Apr 2011 09:01:43 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <dbaryshkov@gmail.com>) id 1Q6jPH-0001qK-4B
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 04 Apr 2011 09:01:24 -0400
Received: from mail-vw0-f45.google.com ([209.85.212.45]:63482)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <dbaryshkov@gmail.com>) id 1Q6jPH-0001qD-0Q
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 04 Apr 2011 09:01:23 -0400
Received: by vws17 with SMTP id 17so4723379vws.4
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Mon, 04 Apr 2011 06:01:22 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTikf92TwwLdZUCsACfzeUbMCd=7P8Q@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1301919339-13464-1-git-send-email-dbaryshkov@gmail.com>
	<1301919339-13464-3-git-send-email-dbaryshkov@gmail.com>
	<BANLkTikf92TwwLdZUCsACfzeUbMCd=7P8Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 4 Apr 2011 17:01:21 +0400
Message-ID: <BANLkTinXDXz6wtbz-K1PR_nOwotw9tbZkQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 3/3] Basic implementation of Sharp Zaurus
	SL-5500 collie PDA
From: Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov <dbaryshkov@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org>
Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org

On 4/4/11, Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org> wrote:
> On 4 April 2011 13:15, Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov <dbaryshkov@gmail.com> wrote:
>> +    s = sa1110_init(collie_binfo.ram_size, cpu_model);
>> +    (void) s;
>
> Is this "(void) s" needed now, or is it a leftover from before code to
> use s later in the function was added, maybe?

ATM it's just a leftover (unnecessary now).

-- 
With best wishes
Dmitry