[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <m1k4yvisji.fsf@fess.ebiederm.org>
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2009 02:42:25 -0700
From: ebiederm@...ssion.com (Eric W. Biederman)
To: Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>
Cc: akpm@...ux-foundation.org, rjw@...k.pl, htmldeveloper@...il.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sysctl: fix false positives when PROC_SYSCTL=n
Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com> 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" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
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 <adobriyan@...il.com>
> ---
>
> 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
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists