linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH linux-next] cifs: remove unused function cifs_oplock_break

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Sun, 10 Aug 2014 14:11:10 -0500
From:	Steve French <smfrench@...il.com>
To:	Vincent Stehlé <vincent.stehle@...oste.net>
Cc:	linux-next@...r.kernel.org,
	"linux-cifs@...r.kernel.org" <linux-cifs@...r.kernel.org>,
	samba-technical <samba-technical@...ts.samba.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Steve French <sfrench@...ba.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH linux-next] cifs: remove unused function cifs_oplock_break_wait

merged into cifs-2.6.git for-next

On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 4:47 PM, Vincent Stehlé
<vincent.stehle@...oste.net> wrote:
> Commit 743162013d40 ("sched: Remove proliferation of wait_on_bit() action
> functions") has removed the call to cifs_oplock_break_wait, making this
> function unused; remove it.
>
> This fixes the following compilation warning:
>
>   fs/cifs/misc.c:578:1: warning: ‘cifs_oplock_break_wait’ defined but not used [-Wunused-function]
>
> Signed-off-by: Vincent Stehlé <vincent.stehle@...oste.net>
> Cc: Steve French <sfrench@...ba.org>
> ---
>
> Hi,
>
> This can be seen with e.g. linux next-20140721 and arm allmodconfig.
>
> Best regards,
>
> V.
>
>  fs/cifs/misc.c | 7 -------
>  1 file changed, 7 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/cifs/misc.c b/fs/cifs/misc.c
> index 9a70792..65c2682 100644
> --- a/fs/cifs/misc.c
> +++ b/fs/cifs/misc.c
> @@ -574,13 +574,6 @@ void cifs_set_oplock_level(struct cifsInodeInfo *cinode, __u32 oplock)
>                 cinode->oplock = 0;
>  }
>
> -static int
> -cifs_oplock_break_wait(void *unused)
> -{
> -       schedule();
> -       return signal_pending(current) ? -ERESTARTSYS : 0;
> -}
> -
>  /*
>   * We wait for oplock breaks to be processed before we attempt to perform
>   * writes.
> --
> 2.0.1
>



-- 
Thanks,

Steve
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/