Bug 60774 - Problem reporter and C storage qualifiers
Summary: Problem reporter and C storage qualifiers
Status: RESOLVED DUPLICATE of bug 57156
Alias: None
Product: kdevelop
Classification: Applications
Component: Problem reporter (show other bugs)
Version: git master
Platform: RedHat Enterprise Linux Linux
: NOR normal
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: KDevelop Developers
URL:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2003-07-05 01:12 UTC by Jon Smirl
Modified: 2007-09-11 19:02 UTC (History)
1 user (show)

See Also:
Latest Commit:
Version Fixed In:
Sentry Crash Report:


Attachments

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Jon Smirl 2003-07-05 01:12:06 UTC
Version:           CVS (using KDE KDE 3.1)
Installed from:    RedHat RPMs

Problem reporter doesn't seem to like the __devinitdata. Remove it and PR is happy. This is C code, not C++.

/** Radeon chip name/architecture table */
static struct radeon_chip_info {
	const char *name;	/**< chip model name */
	unsigned char arch;	/**< chip architecture */
} radeon_chip_info[] __devinitdata = {
	{ "QD", RADEON_R100 },
	{ "QE", RADEON_R100 },
	{ "QF", RADEON_R100 },
	{ "QG", RADEON_R100 },
	{ "VE QY", RADEON_RV100 },
	{ "VE QZ", RADEON_RV100 },
	{ "M7 LW", RADEON_M7 },
	{ "M7 LX", RADEON_M7 },
	{ "M6 LY", RADEON_M6 },
	{ "M6 LZ", RADEON_M6 },
	{ "8500 QL", RADEON_R200 },
	{ "8500 QN", RADEON_R200 },
	{ "8500 QO", RADEON_R200 },
	{ "8500 Ql", RADEON_R200 },
	{ "8500 BB", RADEON_R200 },
	{ "7500 QW", RADEON_RV200 },
	{ "7500 QX", RADEON_RV200 },
	{ "9000 Id", RADEON_RV250 },
	{ "9000 Ie", RADEON_RV250 },
	{ "9000 If", RADEON_RV250 },
	{ "9000 Ig", RADEON_RV250 },
	{ "M9 Ld", RADEON_M9 },
	{ "M9 Le", RADEON_M9 },
	{ "M9 Lf", RADEON_M9 },
	{ "M9 Lg", RADEON_M9 },
	{ "9700 ND", RADEON_R300 },
	{ "9700 NE", RADEON_R300 },
	{ "9700 NF", RADEON_R300 },
	{ "9700 NG", RADEON_R300 }
};
Comment 1 Thiago Macieira 2003-07-05 01:18:24 UTC
What is __devinitdata? It's not any keyword I've heard of. 
 
When I read that code, I see it as erroneous. 
Comment 2 Jens Dagerbo 2006-04-18 22:17:26 UTC

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 57156 ***