On Sat, 12 Dec 2015 16:30:07 -0500
Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> The Kconfig currently controlling compilation of this code is:
>
> config FILE_LOCKING
> bool "Enable POSIX file locking API" if EXPERT
>
> ...meaning that it currently is not being built as a module by anyone.
>
> Lets remove the couple traces of modularity so that when reading the
> driver there is no doubt it is builtin-only.
>
> Since module_init translates to device_initcall in the non-modular
> case, the init ordering gets bumped to one level earlier when we
> use the more appropriate fs_initcall here. However we've made similar
> changes before without any fallout and none is expected here either.
>
> Cc: Jeff Layton <jlayton@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Alexander Viro <viro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: linux-fsdevel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Signed-off-by: Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> fs/locks.c | 3 +--
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/locks.c b/fs/locks.c
> index fa76eb2910a9..15e2b60aa2d1 100644
> --- a/fs/locks.c
> +++ b/fs/locks.c
> @@ -119,7 +119,6 @@
> #include <linux/fdtable.h>
> #include <linux/fs.h>
> #include <linux/init.h>
> -#include <linux/module.h>
> #include <linux/security.h>
> #include <linux/slab.h>
> #include <linux/syscalls.h>
> @@ -2702,7 +2701,7 @@ static int __init proc_locks_init(void)
> proc_create("locks", 0, NULL, &proc_locks_operations);
> return 0;
> }
> -module_init(proc_locks_init);
> +fs_initcall(proc_locks_init);
> #endif
>
> static int __init filelock_init(void)
Looks fine to me and I doubt we'll see any merge conflicts with
anything I have queued so far. Do you need any of us to pick any of
these up or are you going to be merging them as a set?
Acked-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
--
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
