From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Marek Vasut <marek.vasut@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2011 00:45:43 +0100
Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH 12/18] GCC4.6: Squash warnings in smsc95xx.c
In-Reply-To: <201110301859.48522.vapier@gentoo.org>
References: <1319535604-20831-1-git-send-email-marek.vasut@gmail.com>
	<201110302148.50367.marek.vasut@gmail.com>
	<201110301859.48522.vapier@gentoo.org>
Message-ID: <201110310045.44028.marek.vasut@gmail.com>
List-Id: <u-boot.lists.denx.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: u-boot@lists.denx.de

> On Sunday 30 October 2011 16:48:50 Marek Vasut wrote:
> > > On Tuesday 25 October 2011 05:39:58 Marek Vasut wrote:
> > > > --- a/drivers/usb/eth/smsc95xx.c
> > > > +++ b/drivers/usb/eth/smsc95xx.c
> > > > 
> > > > -	addr_lo = cpu_to_le32(*((u32 *)eth->enetaddr));
> > > > +	addr_lo = cpu_to_le32(*eth->enetaddr);
> > > 
> > > pretty sure this is wrong.  enetaddr is a uchar[], so your code now
> > > reads only 1 byte instead of 4.
> > > 
> > > that said, this code also seems to not be endian safe ...
> > 
> > It's good anyone actually cares to properly review. Anyway, why does
> > noone actually care to fix all the damn warnings in their drivers before
> > submitting them in the first place ?!
> 
> the strict alias warnings you are hitting show up only in newer compilers. 
> so i'm sure at the time of their development/submission, they didn't
> exist. -mike

This is a different driver than that armada100_fec.c.