On 02/09/2015 04:30 PM, Tom Haynes wrote:
>
>> On Feb 9, 2015, at 11:07 AM, Anna Schumaker <Anna.Schumaker@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> We fall back to an empty function in the case that CONFIG_PROC_FS=n, so
>> give this function named parameters to silence a "parameter name omitted"
>> warning.
>>
>> Reported-by: Jim Davis <jim.epost@xxxxxxxxx>
>> Signed-off-by: Anna Schumaker <Anna.Schumaker@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> include/linux/sunrpc/metrics.h | 4 ++--
>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/include/linux/sunrpc/metrics.h b/include/linux/sunrpc/metrics.h
>> index 7e61a17..b23b8ed 100644
>> --- a/include/linux/sunrpc/metrics.h
>> +++ b/include/linux/sunrpc/metrics.h
>> @@ -89,8 +89,8 @@ void rpc_free_iostats(struct rpc_iostats *);
>> static inline struct rpc_iostats *rpc_alloc_iostats(struct rpc_clnt *clnt) { return NULL; }
>> static inline void rpc_count_iostats(const struct rpc_task *task,
>> struct rpc_iostats *stats) {}
>
> Hi Anna,
>
> Why doesn’t the above also emit the warning?
Because the parameters have names: in rpc_count_iostats you have an rpc_task named "task" and an rpc_iostats named "stats".
Anna
>
> Thanks,
> Tom
>
>
>> -static inline void rpc_count_iostats_metrics(const struct rpc_task *,
>> - struct rpc_iostats *) {}
>> +static inline void rpc_count_iostats_metrics(const struct rpc_task *task,
>> + struct rpc_iostats *op_metrics) {}
>> static inline void rpc_print_iostats(struct seq_file *seq, struct rpc_clnt *clnt) {}
>> static inline void rpc_free_iostats(struct rpc_iostats *stats) {}
>>
>> --
>> 2.3.0
>>
>> --
>> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in
>> the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
