[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <124506.1285721384@localhost>
Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2010 20:49:44 -0400
From: Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu
To: "N.P.S. N.P.S." <napohybelskurwysynom2010@...il.com>
cc: akpm@...ux-foundation.org, mm-commits@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: mmotm 2010-09-28-16-13 uploaded
On Wed, 29 Sep 2010 02:27:55 +0200, "N.P.S. N.P.S." said:
> Hi,
>
> 2010/9/29 <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>:
> > The mm-of-the-moment snapshot 2010-09-28-16-13 has been uploaded to
>
> I wonder why are these two functions in include/linux/fs.h
> static inline void lock_flocks()
> {
> }
>
> static inline void unlock_flocks()
> {
> }
Those were added as part of the kill-the-BKL project. They used to be
done as #defines to lock_kernel and unlock_kernel, but became full-fledged
functions in this release. Unfortunately, if you build with CONFIG_FILE_LOCKING=n
you need to provide a dummy stub, which is what was intended here.
Does the following (untested) fix the problem for you?
Signed-Off-By: Valdis Kletnieks <valdis.kletnieks@...edu>
--- linux-2.6.36-rc5-mmotm0928/include/linux/fs.h.dist 2010-09-28 20:46:29.276970365 -0400
+++ linux-2.6.36-rc5-mmotm0928/include/linux/fs.h 2010-09-28 20:47:34.221924470 -0400
@@ -1274,11 +1274,11 @@ static inline int lock_may_write(struct
return 1;
}
-static inline void lock_flocks()
+static inline void lock_flocks(void)
{
}
-static inline void unlock_flocks()
+static inline void unlock_flocks(void)
{
}
--
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