One-liner fix for i2c-velleman on alpha

One-liner fix for i2c-velleman on alpha

[Kelledin]

i2c-velleman.c needs to pick up the HZ macro.  It does this fine 
on x86, but it needs a little extra help on alpha.  Patch 
attached; doesn't appear to break the x86 compile.

I don't actually have or use this device, so someone else will 
need to test this out...I just wanted i2c to compile.

Also, I'm seeing a lot of "cast from pointer to integer of 
different size" warnings compiling this same driver, mostly 
having to do with the CTRL macro.  This worries me, especially 
on 64-bit platforms.  Should I be worried in this case?

-- 
Kelledin
"If a server crashes in a server farm and no one pings it, does 
it still cost four figures to fix?"
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: i2c-2.8.0-velleman.patch
Type: text/x-diff
Size: 382 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.lm-sensors.org/pipermail/lm-sensors/attachments/20030724/3b861bf8/i2c-2.8.0-velleman.bin

One-liner fix for i2c-velleman on alpha

[Jean Delvare]

> i2c-velleman.c needs to pick up the HZ macro.  It does this fine 
> on x86, but it needs a little extra help on alpha.  Patch 
> attached; doesn't appear to break the x86 compile.
> 
> I don't actually have or use this device, so someone else will 
> need to test this out...I just wanted i2c to compile.

OK, I'd prefer a slightly different fix. We don't include <asm/param.h>
in any of our drivers. It seems we include <linux/slab.h> instead, so I
think we should do the same for this one. Could you try and confirm it
works for you?

The i2c-philips-par driver seems to miss it too. Were you successful
building it?

> Also, I'm seeing a lot of "cast from pointer to integer of 
> different size" warnings compiling this same driver, mostly 
> having to do with the CTRL macro.  This worries me, especially 
> on 64-bit platforms.  Should I be worried in this case?

I saw hundreds of warnings on perfectly clean code while I was compiling
on a IA-64 system recently. I don't think you should be afraid. Just
remove the -Wall flag if you want gcc to leave you alone. If there are
still warnings after that, then we will take a look at them.

-- 
Jean Delvare
http://www.ensicaen.ismra.fr/~delvare/