From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932097AbXEAC0G (ORCPT ); Mon, 30 Apr 2007 22:26:06 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S933410AbXEAC0F (ORCPT ); Mon, 30 Apr 2007 22:26:05 -0400 Received: from smtp1.linux-foundation.org ([65.172.181.25]:57942 "EHLO smtp1.linux-foundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932097AbXEAC0C (ORCPT ); Mon, 30 Apr 2007 22:26:02 -0400 Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2007 19:25:44 -0700 From: Andrew Morton To: Randy Dunlap Cc: David Rientjes , Linus Torvalds , Neela Kolli , Christoph Hellwig , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [patch] megaraid: fix CONFIG_PROC_FS compile errors Message-Id: <20070430192544.5ee78178.akpm@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <20070430084414.be98e552.randy.dunlap@oracle.com> References: <20070430084414.be98e552.randy.dunlap@oracle.com> X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 2.2.7 (GTK+ 2.8.17; x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 30 Apr 2007 08:44:14 -0700 Randy Dunlap wrote: > On Mon, 30 Apr 2007 07:35:00 -0700 (PDT) David Rientjes wrote: > > > Only declare mega_proc_dir_entry() in CONFIG_PROC_FS. We should call > > mega_create_proc_entry() only in this configuration so make sure it's defined > > if we call it. > > > > Only define mega_adapinq() in CONFIG_PROC_FS. mega_internal_dev_inquiry() > > and mega_print_inquiry() were never declared without CONFIG_PROC_FS so > > make sure we don't have prototypes for them if we aren't going to define > > them. > > > > Move the declaration of 'buf' in mega_remove_one() because we only use it > > in the CONFIG_PROC_FS case. > > Just noting the presence of: > http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/akpm/patches/2.6/2.6.21-rc7/2.6.21-rc7-mm2/broken-out/megaraid-fix-warnings-when-config_proc_fs=n.patch > That patch has been submitted fourteen times in the past year, and was completely ignored each time. > > Oh, and that SCSI patches need to go to the linux-scsi mailing list. > There seem to be little point in doing that.