From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758149AbZJPJnN (ORCPT ); Fri, 16 Oct 2009 05:43:13 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1758116AbZJPJnL (ORCPT ); Fri, 16 Oct 2009 05:43:11 -0400 Received: from out01.mta.xmission.com ([166.70.13.231]:50559 "EHLO out01.mta.xmission.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755493AbZJPJnK (ORCPT ); Fri, 16 Oct 2009 05:43:10 -0400 To: Alexey Dobriyan Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, rjw@sisk.pl, htmldeveloper@gmail.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <20091015132323.bea94a13.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20091016002837.GA4185@x200> From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2009 02:42:25 -0700 In-Reply-To: <20091016002837.GA4185@x200> (Alexey Dobriyan's message of "Fri\, 16 Oct 2009 04\:28\:37 +0400") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-XM-SPF: eid=;;;mid=;;;hst=in02.mta.xmission.com;;;ip=76.21.114.89;;;frm=ebiederm@xmission.com;;;spf=neutral X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 76.21.114.89 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: ebiederm@xmission.com X-Spam-DCC: XMission; sa01 1397; Body=1 Fuz1=1 Fuz2=1 X-Spam-Combo: ;Alexey Dobriyan X-Spam-Relay-Country: X-Spam-Report: * -1.8 ALL_TRUSTED Passed through trusted hosts only via SMTP * 0.0 T_TM2_M_HEADER_IN_MSG BODY: T_TM2_M_HEADER_IN_MSG * -3.0 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1% * [score: 0.0000] * -0.0 DCC_CHECK_NEGATIVE Not listed in DCC * [sa01 1397; Body=1 Fuz1=1 Fuz2=1] * 0.0 T_TooManySym_01 4+ unique symbols in subject * 0.0 XM_SPF_Neutral SPF-Neutral * 0.4 UNTRUSTED_Relay Comes from a non-trusted relay Subject: Re: [PATCH] sysctl: fix false positives when PROC_SYSCTL=n X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Thu, 25 Oct 2007 00:26:12 +0000) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on in02.mta.xmission.com) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Alexey Dobriyan writes: > Having ->procname but not ->proc_handler is valid when PROC_SYSCTL=n, > people use such combination to reduce ifdefs with non-standard handlers. > > http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14408 Acked-by: "Eric W. Biederman" It looks like I messed up when I wrote sysctl_check.c and used the wrong ifdef. Silly me. Especially since I had added PROC_SYSCTL earlier. Eric > Signed-off-by: Alexey Dobriyan > --- > > kernel/sysctl_check.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > --- a/kernel/sysctl_check.c > +++ b/kernel/sysctl_check.c > @@ -1521,7 +1521,7 @@ int sysctl_check_table(struct nsproxy *namespaces, struct ctl_table *table) > if (!table->ctl_name && table->strategy) > set_fail(&fail, table, "Strategy without ctl_name"); > #endif > -#ifdef CONFIG_PROC_FS > +#ifdef CONFIG_PROC_SYSCTL > if (table->procname && !table->proc_handler) > set_fail(&fail, table, "No proc_handler"); > #endif