[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <201002060958.16360.arnd@arndb.de>
Date: Sat, 6 Feb 2010 09:58:16 +0100
From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Amerigo Wang <amwang@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [Patch] compat ioctl: fix some build warnings
On Friday 05 February 2010, Andrew Morton wrote:
> Unfortunately that adds more code for something which cannot happen at
> runtime.
>
> I guess we could do this trick:
>
> --- a/fs/compat_ioctl.c~a
> +++ a/fs/compat_ioctl.c
> @@ -539,7 +539,7 @@ static int mt_ioctl_trans(unsigned int f
> kcmd = MTIOCPOS;
> karg = &pos;
> break;
> - case MTIOCGET32:
> + default: /* MTIOCGET32 */
> kcmd = MTIOCGET;
> karg = &get;
> break;
> @@ -657,7 +657,7 @@ static int raw_ioctl(unsigned fd, unsign
>
> switch (cmd) {
> case RAW_SETBIND:
> - case RAW_GETBIND: {
> + default: { /* RAW_GETBIND */
> struct raw_config_request req;
> mm_segment_t oldfs = get_fs();
>
Looks good to me. Actually, we could just kill the switch/case
statement in raw_ioctl entirely, but I wouldn't bother at this
point any more because there are already patches from both Al
and me to kill that function by moving it into drivers/char/raw.c
I need to check what happened to that patch and to the other
patches I have removing code form fs/compat_ioctl.c, they might
need to be updated before I can submit them for the next merge.
In the meantime,
Acked-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
--
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