xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Conflicting Types Between .h and .c files

To: Danny Cox <DCox@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Conflicting Types Between .h and .c files
From: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxx>
Date: 19 Aug 2002 14:40:08 -0500
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, XFS Mailing List <linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <1029783129.1147.37.camel@wiley>
References: <1029504550.1808.5.camel@wiley> <20020819194735.A32101@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1029783129.1147.37.camel@wiley>
Sender: owner-linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
Danny - FWIW, xfs compiles for me with no warnings, using gcc version
2.96 20000731 (Red Hat Linux 7.3 2.96-110) on today's CVS tree.

-Eric

On Mon, 2002-08-19 at 13:52, Danny Cox wrote:
> Christoph,
> 
> On Mon, 2002-08-19 at 14:47, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > > while the .c file sez its:
> > > 
> > >   kmem_zone_t *<grump>;
> > > 
> > > While I know it's the same thing, the compiler (2.96 from RH) apparently
> > 
> > I don't think that's valid.  And at least gcc 3.2 doesn't complain..
> 
>       Yes, but 2.96 does.  I'd think that several folks use 2.96, since
> that's the standard gcc from RH 7.2.
> 
> > In this case not, as the kmem_zone_t is an object opaque to it's user.
> > Compare it to kmem_cache_t in þhe core Linux code.
> 
>       Okay, point taken.  Nevertheless, the types between the .c and .h files
> should be consistent, whatever is chosen, no?
> 
> -- 
> kernel, n.: A part of an operating system that preserves the
> medieval traditions of sorcery and black art.
> 
> Danny
> 
-- 
Eric Sandeen      XFS for Linux     http://oss.sgi.com/projects/xfs
sandeen@xxxxxxx   SGI, Inc.         651-683-3102



<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>