* Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > 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 */
thanks!
Acked-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxx>
Ingo
--
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
