Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1750817AbWASXlv (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 Jan 2006 18:41:51 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751207AbWASXlu (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 Jan 2006 18:41:50 -0500 Received: from smtp002.mail.ukl.yahoo.com ([217.12.11.33]:31925 "HELO smtp002.mail.ukl.yahoo.com") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1750817AbWASXlg (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 Jan 2006 18:41:36 -0500 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.it; h=Received:From:To:Subject:Date:User-Agent:Cc:References:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Disposition:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Message-Id; b=tZKJiLle6Sz5ELzYxdaS/8WoR+/MVFXEOJZmmNFNE4snFTVI42kGz0I6jd9ItCCP4KNR4HAAtdoMoMF8kGPLLv5BqhYKpzREiDX/S1MsqvJHmDvGuS8crPgxkVaFPxL2AAfT4xrdYodmbricboZhrLjLP29yH2PTGBemFfmuJyU= ; From: Blaisorblade To: Jeff Dike Subject: Re: [uml-devel] [PATCH 8/8] uml: avoid "CONFIG_NR_CPUS undeclared" bogus error messages Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 00:41:08 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.8.3 Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, user-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net References: <20060118235132.4626.74049.stgit@zion.home.lan> <200601191601.31805.blaisorblade@yahoo.it> <20060119194356.GA8670@ccure.user-mode-linux.org> In-Reply-To: <20060119194356.GA8670@ccure.user-mode-linux.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200601200041.14590.blaisorblade@yahoo.it> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1559 Lines: 46 On Thursday 19 January 2006 20:43, Jeff Dike wrote: > On Thu, Jan 19, 2006 at 04:01:28PM +0100, Blaisorblade wrote: > > Gerd Knorr in his tty patch, instead, used forward declarations, like: > > > > struct task_struct; > > > > what about that? > I don't think so. At least when you use void *, you are using a type > that's not incorrect. In userspace code, those task_structs start > referring to host task_structs, which is definitely very wrong. Possibly yes, but as long as we don't dereference the pointer (and in a prototype you're not going to do that) there's no problem. Using a type makes the code clearer, and it doesn't hide any warning GCC may give (behaving well is left to us only). In fact, btw (before I forget) we have currently the wrong errno used in sys-i386/ldt.c. Just wrote the fix (it's adding a silly os_ptrace_ldt). Going to compile and send. > > Those functions probably should be moved anyway because they're > > useless there > Yeah. > Jeff -- Inform me of my mistakes, so I can keep imitating Homer Simpson's "Doh!". Paolo Giarrusso, aka Blaisorblade (Skype ID "PaoloGiarrusso", ICQ 215621894) http://www.user-mode-linux.org/~blaisorblade ___________________________________ Yahoo! Mail: gratis 1GB per i messaggi e allegati da 10MB http://mail.yahoo.it - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/