From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1IwNrH-0005OR-SY for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 25 Nov 2007 15:13:39 -0500 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1IwNrG-0005NF-0X for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 25 Nov 2007 15:13:39 -0500 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IwNrF-0005NC-TG for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 25 Nov 2007 15:13:37 -0500 Received: from ug-out-1314.google.com ([66.249.92.174]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1IwNrF-0005zf-LN for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 25 Nov 2007 15:13:37 -0500 Received: by ug-out-1314.google.com with SMTP id m2so807543uge for ; Sun, 25 Nov 2007 12:13:36 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2007 21:13:36 +0100 From: "andrzej zaborowski" Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] pflash_register question In-Reply-To: <4749D5EB.8060308@kama-aina.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <4749D5EB.8060308@kama-aina.net> Reply-To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org On 25/11/2007, Armin wrote: > I see there are two instances of pflash_register() , one for > pflash_cfi01.c and the other in pflash_cfi02.c. In order to get the > proper one, I assume we use link order? No, ofcourse we will need to rename one of them. To be honest, I missed the fact that the functions collide when I merged pflash_cfi01.c. Regards