[PATCH net-2.6.25 1/6][CORE] Remove unneeded ifdefs from sysctl_net_core.c

[PATCH net-2.6.25 1/6][CORE] Remove unneeded ifdefs from sysctl_net_core.c

[Pavel Emelyanov]

They include the whole file, but it is already compiled
out when SYSCTL=n, since it is obj-$(CONFIG_SYSCTL) target
in the Makefile.

Signed-off-by: Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@openvz.org>

---

diff --git a/net/core/sysctl_net_core.c b/net/core/sysctl_net_core.c
index 113cc72..277c8fa 100644
--- a/net/core/sysctl_net_core.c
+++ b/net/core/sysctl_net_core.c
@@ -13,8 +13,6 @@
 #include <net/sock.h>
 #include <net/xfrm.h>
 
-#ifdef CONFIG_SYSCTL
-
 ctl_table core_table[] = {
 #ifdef CONFIG_NET
 	{
@@ -151,5 +149,3 @@ ctl_table core_table[] = {
 	},
 	{ .ctl_name = 0 }
 };
-
-#endif
-- 
1.5.3.4

Re: [PATCH net-2.6.25 1/6][CORE] Remove unneeded ifdefs from sysctl_net_core.c

[Eric W. Biederman]

Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@openvz.org> writes:

> They include the whole file, but it is already compiled
> out when SYSCTL=n, since it is obj-$(CONFIG_SYSCTL) target
> in the Makefile.

Pavel thanks for sending these patches.  Might I ask
for some level of acknowledgement when you rework one of
my patches and send it off.

I suppose this could be a case of duplicate thinking but
this patch looks very familiar.

Eric


> Signed-off-by: Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@openvz.org>
>
> ---
>
> diff --git a/net/core/sysctl_net_core.c b/net/core/sysctl_net_core.c
> index 113cc72..277c8fa 100644
> --- a/net/core/sysctl_net_core.c
> +++ b/net/core/sysctl_net_core.c
> @@ -13,8 +13,6 @@
>  #include <net/sock.h>
>  #include <net/xfrm.h>
>  
> -#ifdef CONFIG_SYSCTL
> -
>  ctl_table core_table[] = {
>  #ifdef CONFIG_NET
>  	{
> @@ -151,5 +149,3 @@ ctl_table core_table[] = {
>  	},
>  	{ .ctl_name = 0 }
>  };
> -
> -#endif
> -- 
> 1.5.3.4
>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Re: [PATCH net-2.6.25 1/6][CORE] Remove unneeded ifdefs from sysctl_net_core.c

[Pavel Emelyanov]

Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@openvz.org> writes:
> 
>> They include the whole file, but it is already compiled
>> out when SYSCTL=n, since it is obj-$(CONFIG_SYSCTL) target
>> in the Makefile.
> 
> Pavel thanks for sending these patches.  Might I ask
> for some level of acknowledgement when you rework one of
> my patches and send it off.

Sure. I though I've been doing exactly this thing. I've said
that unix ctls were from your tree and so on.

> I suppose this could be a case of duplicate thinking but
> this patch looks very familiar.

Hm... Do you mean that this one is from your tree? Sorry then,
I didn't know this. I can resend it with From: <you> if you wish.

> Eric

Thanks,
Pavel

>> Signed-off-by: Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@openvz.org>
>>
>> ---
>>
>> diff --git a/net/core/sysctl_net_core.c b/net/core/sysctl_net_core.c
>> index 113cc72..277c8fa 100644
>> --- a/net/core/sysctl_net_core.c
>> +++ b/net/core/sysctl_net_core.c
>> @@ -13,8 +13,6 @@
>>  #include <net/sock.h>
>>  #include <net/xfrm.h>
>>  
>> -#ifdef CONFIG_SYSCTL
>> -
>>  ctl_table core_table[] = {
>>  #ifdef CONFIG_NET
>>  	{
>> @@ -151,5 +149,3 @@ ctl_table core_table[] = {
>>  	},
>>  	{ .ctl_name = 0 }
>>  };
>> -
>> -#endif
>> -- 
>> 1.5.3.4
>>
>> --
>> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
>> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
>> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> 

Re: [PATCH net-2.6.25 1/6][CORE] Remove unneeded ifdefs from sysctl_net_core.c

[Eric W. Biederman]

Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@openvz.org> writes:

> Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>> Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@openvz.org> writes:
>> 
>>> They include the whole file, but it is already compiled
>>> out when SYSCTL=n, since it is obj-$(CONFIG_SYSCTL) target
>>> in the Makefile.
>> 
>> Pavel thanks for sending these patches.  Might I ask
>> for some level of acknowledgement when you rework one of
>> my patches and send it off.
>
> Sure. I though I've been doing exactly this thing. I've said
> that unix ctls were from your tree and so on.

Ok.  I guess I must have overlooked that attribution.

>> I suppose this could be a case of duplicate thinking but
>> this patch looks very familiar.
>
> Hm... Do you mean that this one is from your tree? Sorry then,
> I didn't know this. I can resend it with From: <you> if you wish.

It is.  But I don't see any of this as needing a resend.  Please
just don't forget me in the future is all I ask.

Eric