On Sat, Jun 19, 2010 at 07:04, Justin P. Mattock
<justinmattock@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Also wrong, you removed the creation of the links in sysfs.
>>
>> The assignment to nowarn was there to avoid another compiler warning,
>> as sysfs_create_link() is marked __must_check.
>
> I also went back to this one and made the following changes.. let me know if
> it's wrong etc..
>
> From 4f45beed80627d2bb32fb021bb6d22d88089557b Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Justin P. Mattock <justinmattock@xxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2010 22:01:07 -0700
> Subject: [PATCH 5/5] module.c
> Signed-off-by: Justin P. Mattock <justinmattock@xxxxxxxxx>
>
> ---
> kernel/module.c | 3 +--
> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/module.c b/kernel/module.c
> index 8c6b428..48fc5c8 100644
> --- a/kernel/module.c
> +++ b/kernel/module.c
> @@ -1340,11 +1340,10 @@ static void add_usage_links(struct module *mod)
> {
> #ifdef CONFIG_MODULE_UNLOAD
> struct module_use *use;
> - int nowarn;
>
> mutex_lock(&module_mutex);
> list_for_each_entry(use, &mod->target_list, target_list) {
> - nowarn = sysfs_create_link(use->target->holders_dir,
> + sysfs_create_link(use->target->holders_dir,
> &mod->mkobj.kobj, mod->name);
> }
> mutex_unlock(&module_mutex);
> --
> 1.7.1.rc1.21.gf3bd6
>
> if it looks good, then I can resend it out.
Have you compile-tested this?
As sysfs_create_link() is marked __must_check, that will cause another compiler
warning, but only if CONFIG_SYSFS=y.
Perhaps you can just mark the nowarn variable __unused?
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
