From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Harvey Harrison <harvey.harrison@gmail.com>
Cc: viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk, linux-next@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] proc: make grab_header static
Date: Thu, 17 Jul 2008 15:09:50 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080717150950.5d721d90.akpm@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1216329755.6029.31.camel@brick>
On Thu, 17 Jul 2008 14:22:35 -0700
Harvey Harrison <harvey.harrison@gmail.com> wrote:
> fs/proc/proc_sysctl.c:69:25: warning: symbol 'grab_header' was not declared. Should it be static?
>
> Signed-off-by: Harvey Harrison <harvey.harrison@gmail.com>
> ---
> Appeared between next-20080716 and next-20080717
>
> fs/proc/proc_sysctl.c | 2 +-
> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/proc/proc_sysctl.c b/fs/proc/proc_sysctl.c
> index f9a8b89..84f58e8 100644
> --- a/fs/proc/proc_sysctl.c
> +++ b/fs/proc/proc_sysctl.c
> @@ -66,7 +66,7 @@ static struct ctl_table *find_in_table(struct ctl_table *p, struct qstr *name)
> return NULL;
> }
>
> -struct ctl_table_header *grab_header(struct inode *inode)
> +static struct ctl_table_header *grab_header(struct inode *inode)
> {
> if (PROC_I(inode)->sysctl)
> return sysctl_head_grab(PROC_I(inode)->sysctl);
urgh. We need to do something here.
People are dumping large hunks of 2.6.28 material into linux-next
during the merge window. This screws me up because I haven't merged
into 2.6.27 yet, and my patch queue is based on linux-next. And I
_have_ to do that, because lots of the git trees haven't merged into
mainline yet.
So to maintain my tree I need to forward-port patches on top of the
newly-added 2.6.28 material, then backport it all onto mainline for
merging (which will wreck the next linux-next release).
I hadn't anticipated this.
It's nothing new - it used to happen when -mm was a collection of 70
git-foo.patch as well.
See, for the purposes of tree maintainers who haven't merged yet,
linux-next is still the 2.6.27 candidate tree. For those who _have_
merged, linux-next becomes the 2.6.28 candidate tree.
We'll see how it goes, but we might need a "don't merge 2.6.x+1 stuff
into linux-next until 2.6.x-rc1 has been released" rule.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-07-17 22:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-07-17 21:22 [PATCH 3/3] proc: make grab_header static Harvey Harrison
2008-07-17 22:09 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2008-07-17 22:15 ` Harvey Harrison
2008-07-17 22:38 ` Andrew Morton
2008-07-17 23:23 ` Al Viro
2008-07-17 23:36 ` Andrew Morton
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20080717150950.5d721d90.akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=harvey.harrison@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-next@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.