Ok, the only reasonable way to deal with the last reiserfs vs.
sparc32 compilation warning is apparently to strip the const from
the wait_buffer_until_released() prototype, as it doesn't make any
sense there. Marcelo please disregard the atomic_read() patch and
apply the following instead:
diff -urN linux-2.4.20-pre5/fs/reiserfs/buffer2.c linux-2.4.20-pre5.n/fs/reiserfs/buffer2.c
--- linux-2.4.20-pre5/fs/reiserfs/buffer2.c 2002-09-01 17:19:26.000000000 +0200
+++ linux-2.4.20-pre5.n/fs/reiserfs/buffer2.c 2002-09-01 17:07:27.000000000 +0200
@@ -21,7 +21,7 @@
hold we did free all buffers in tree balance structure
(get_empty_nodes and get_nodes_for_preserving) or in path structure
only (get_new_buffer) just before calling this */
-void wait_buffer_until_released (const struct buffer_head * bh)
+void wait_buffer_until_released (struct buffer_head *bh)
{
int repeat_counter = 0;
diff -urN linux-2.4.20-pre5/include/linux/reiserfs_fs.h linux-2.4.20-pre5.n/include/linux/reiserfs_fs.h
--- linux-2.4.20-pre5/include/linux/reiserfs_fs.h 2002-09-01 17:19:27.000000000 +0200
+++ linux-2.4.20-pre5.n/include/linux/reiserfs_fs.h 2002-09-01 17:16:32.000000000 +0200
@@ -1845,7 +1847,7 @@
/* buffer2.c */
struct buffer_head * reiserfs_getblk (kdev_t n_dev, int n_block, int n_size);
-void wait_buffer_until_released (const struct buffer_head * bh);
+void wait_buffer_until_released (struct buffer_head *bh);
struct buffer_head * reiserfs_bread (struct super_block *super, int n_block,
int n_size);
-
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/