From: Greg KH <greg@kroah.com>
To: Rakib Mullick <rakib.mullick@gmail.com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fs, sysfs: Change sysfs_pathname function prototype.
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2010 04:19:17 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20101111121917.GA933@kroah.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTimTy0vngwuM=jWfeU7qgqznamPgAftX7=2LShL+@mail.gmail.com>
On Thu, Nov 11, 2010 at 12:11:34PM +0600, Rakib Mullick wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 11, 2010 at 12:39 AM, Greg KH <greg@kroah.com> wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 10:53:37AM +0600, Rakib Mullick wrote:
> >> On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 4:44 AM, Greg KH <greg@kroah.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > If it's really not used then why would marking it inline help out any?
> >> > Shouldn't we just delete the function instead?
> >> >
> >> As far as I can see, its been called recursively and also from
> >> sysfs_add_one. Am I missing anything?
> >
> > If so, then what is the compiler warning that is being generated that
> > you are trying to resolve?
> >
>
> Yes - its really confusing. Actually, sysfs_pathname is called from
> WARN(). So - when #ifndef WARN is false, then we're having that
> problem and sysfs_pathname isn't used that time. So, the proposed
> patch isn't the correct fix. Maybe, splitting up the WARN message and
> calling sysfs_pathname is the correct one. Am I right?
perhaps, yes, that might be correct, but as almost no one builds with
WARN not enabled, is this a real issue?
thanks,
greg k-h
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-11-11 12:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-10-31 11:48 [PATCH] fs, sysfs: Change sysfs_pathname function prototype Rakib Mullick
2010-11-09 22:44 ` Greg KH
2010-11-10 4:53 ` Rakib Mullick
2010-11-10 18:39 ` Greg KH
2010-11-11 6:11 ` Rakib Mullick
2010-11-11 12:19 ` Greg KH [this message]
2010-11-11 16:36 ` Rakib Mullick
2010-11-13 13:35 ` Rakib Mullick
2010-11-13 14:45 ` Greg KH
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=20101111121917.GA933@kroah.com \
--to=greg@kroah.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rakib.mullick@gmail.com \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox