Re: [current tinderbox] failure on ...all...

Joseph Koshy <joseph.koshy_at_gmail.com> writes:
> I don't understand why that particular warning was generated i
> in the first place, the cast was between two structures with
> identical layout, differing only in name.

The warning is correct.  Two identical types with different names are
not the same type unless one is a direct or indirect typedef for the
other.

It also seems strange to me that you on the one hand introduce a new
struct to separate MD and MI interfaces, and on the other hand
continue to assume that they are assignment-compatible.  The code the
tinderbox complained about would break badly if you extended the MD
struct without recompiling userland (old userland on new kernel); now
it won't, which I believe was the point.

DES
-- 
Dag-Erling Smørgrav - des_at_des.no