[U-Boot] [PATCH] arm:fix:cleanup: Volatile keyword removal

[Lukasz Majewski <l.majewski@samsung.com>]

On Sat, 18 Feb 2012 12:19:23 +0100
Albert ARIBAUD <albert.u.boot@aribaud.net> wrote:

> Hi Lukasz,
> 
> Le 18/10/2011 16:25, Lukasz Majewski a ?crit :
> > Volatile keyword removal from
> > ./arch/arm/include/asm/bitops.h
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Lukasz Majewski<l.majewski@samsung.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Kyungmin Park<kyungmin.park@samsung.com>
> > ---
> >   arch/arm/include/asm/bitops.h |    6 +++---
> >   1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/arm/include/asm/bitops.h
> > b/arch/arm/include/asm/bitops.h index 879e20e..b00ae30 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm/include/asm/bitops.h
> > +++ b/arch/arm/include/asm/bitops.h
> > @@ -25,11 +25,11 @@
> >   /*
> >    * Function prototypes to keep gcc -Wall happy.
> >    */
> > -extern void set_bit(int nr, volatile void * addr);
> > +extern void set_bit(int nr, void *addr);
> >
> > -extern void clear_bit(int nr, volatile void * addr);
> > +extern void clear_bit(int nr, void *addr);
> >
> > -extern void change_bit(int nr, volatile void * addr);
> > +extern void change_bit(int nr, void *addr);
> >
> >   static inline void __change_bit(int nr, volatile void *addr)
> >   {
> 
> Going through backlogged patches adelegated to me, I found this one.
> I'm fine with it, however I notice there is absolutely no call to
> set_bit, change_bit or clear_bit in the whole ARM subtree... What is
> the point of removing only the volatile qualifier vs removing the
> function definitions?
> 
> Amicalement,

Hi Albert,

This patch was a supplement (to quiet compiler warnings) to the USB
gadget infrastructure.

But as we know, usb:gadget hasn't been added to the u-boot mainline.

However, I'm working on this, so I predict, that in the (near) future I
would need those changes to suppress compiler warnings :-).

For now, the commit can be discarded, I will resubmit it if needed.

-- 
Best regards,

Lukasz Majewski

Samsung Poland R&D Center
Platform Group