On October 13, 2014 9:46:50 PM CDT, Gedare Bloom <ged...@rtems.org> wrote:
>---
> cpukit/libfs/src/rfs/rtems-rfs-rtems-dev.c | 4 ++--
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
>diff --git a/cpukit/libfs/src/rfs/rtems-rfs-rtems-dev.c
>b/cpukit/libfs/src/rfs/rtems-rfs-rtems-dev.c
>index 28e4739..48a6737 100644
>--- a/cpukit/libfs/src/rfs/rtems-rfs-rtems-dev.c
>+++ b/cpukit/libfs/src/rfs/rtems-rfs-rtems-dev.c
>@@ -30,7 +30,7 @@ rtems_rfs_rtems_device_get_major_and_minor ( const
>rtems_libio_t *iop,
> rtems_device_minor_number *minor)
> {
> *major = iop->data0;
>- *minor = (rtems_device_minor_number) iop->data1;
>+ *minor = (rtems_device_minor_number)(uintptr_t) iop->data1;
> }
>
Isn't the minor always 32 bits? Could this shorten the value?
> /**
>@@ -77,7 +77,7 @@ rtems_rfs_rtems_device_open ( rtems_libio_t *iop,
> rtems_rfs_rtems_unlock (fs);
>
> iop->data0 = major;
>- iop->data1 = (void *) minor;
>+ iop->data1 = (void *)(uintptr_t) minor;
>
This seems OK if the data value goes in OK.
> return rtems_deviceio_open (iop, pathname, oflag, mode, minor, major);
> }
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
devel@rtems.org
http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
