On Sun, 25 Nov 2012, Mouse wrote:
./arm/lock.h:78:1: error: type qualifiers ignored on function return typeIt would seem that [...] we are unable to have the inline function return a volatile value?Well, the warning is not entirely unreasonable; what does volatile (or other qualifier) even _mean_ for a non-lvalue? Because of the way the return value is specified with a typedef, and why that typedef specifies volatile, I think simply suppressing the warning actually is a right answer in this case.
Well, the non-KERNEL definition of the function already has type "int" instead of "__cpu_simple_lock_t" (which, for non-KERNEL, is defined as "volatile int") so it seems to me that consistency would prefer that we avoid the warning rather than suppress it.
Based on this, I'm about to commit the change. Port masters (or others) are free to over-ride me on this.
:) ------------------------------------------------------------------------- | Paul Goyette | PGP Key fingerprint: | E-mail addresses: | | Customer Service | FA29 0E3B 35AF E8AE 6651 | paul at whooppee.com | | Network Engineer | 0786 F758 55DE 53BA 7731 | pgoyette at juniper.net | | Kernel Developer | | pgoyette at netbsd.org | -------------------------------------------------------------------------