> Is destroy_params() dependent on SYSFS? If yes then it would be
Yes.
> far cleaner if there was a NOP destroy_params() inline for the
> !SYSFS case.
From: Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@xxxxxxxxxx>
Fix this build error when CONFIG_SYSFS=n:
kernel/built-in.o: In function `free_module':
module.c:(.text+0x4f8a2): undefined reference to `destroy_params'
Signed-off-by: Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@xxxxxxxxxx>
cc: Rusty Russell <rusty@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
kernel/params.c | 6 ++++++
1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
--- linux-next-20090218.orig/kernel/params.c
+++ linux-next-20090218/kernel/params.c
@@ -761,6 +761,12 @@ static int __init param_sysfs_init(void)
}
subsys_initcall(param_sysfs_init);
+#else /* !CONFIG_SYSFS */
+
+inline void destroy_params(const struct kernel_param *params, unsigned num)
+{
+}
+
#endif /* CONFIG_SYSFS */
EXPORT_SYMBOL(param_set_byte);
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-next" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
