On Nov 30, 2007, at 2:41 PM, Tom Tucker wrote:
> On Fri, 2007-11-30 at 12:16 -0500, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
>> On Fri, Nov 30, 2007 at 09:59:28AM -0600, Tom Tucker wrote:
>>> I'm mystified as to why I didn't get these warnings. I built on a
>>> 64 bit
>>> machine. It seems like that would give the warning since unsigned
>>> isn't even the same size as int.
>> Yeah, I can't see how any compiler could miss that. How do you
>> From emacs on my desktop...
> ssh [email protected] "cd /home/tom/src/linux-2.6 && ntpdate <servername>
> && make && make modules_install && make install"
> The target system is an AMD64. Here's uname -a...
> Linux demo1 2.6.24-rc3-merged-svc #12 SMP Fri Nov 30 08:51:15 CST
> 2007 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
> The compiler version..
> gcc version 4.1.1 20070105 (Red Hat 4.1.1-52)
> The output after changing the type back to int ...
> ssh [email protected] "cd /home/tom/src/linux-2.6 && ntpdate dell3 && make"
> 30 Nov 11:21:38 ntpdate: step time server 10.10.0.102 offset
> -1.150670 sec
> CHK include/linux/version.h
> CHK include/linux/utsrelease.h
> CALL scripts/checksyscalls.sh
> CHK include/linux/compile.h
> CC [M] net/sunrpc/svc_rdma.o
> CC [M] net/sunrpc/svc_rdma_transport.o
> CC [M] net/sunrpc/svc_rdma_marshal.o
> CC [M] net/sunrpc/svc_rdma_sendto.o
> CC [M] net/sunrpc/svc_rdma_recvfrom.o
> LD [M] net/sunrpc/sunrpc.o
> LD [M] net/sunrpc/svcrdma.o
> Kernel: arch/x86/boot/bzImage is ready (#12)
> Building modules, stage 2.
> MODPOST 1294 modules
> LD [M] net/sunrpc/sunrpc.ko
> LD [M] net/sunrpc/svcrdma.ko
> No warning...
I've found that gcc on x86_64 tends to be "more forgiving." I get a
lot more warnings on x86.