[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20171104080134.7i6vv2avlxqdvvz3@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 4 Nov 2017 09:01:34 +0100
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To: Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>
Cc: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Linux-Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: build warnings after merge of the tip tree
* Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org> wrote:
> > net/sctp/probe.c: In function 'sctpprobe_exit':
> > net/sctp/probe.c:240:2: warning: 'unregister_jprobe' is deprecated [-Wdeprecated-declarations]
> > unregister_jprobe(&sctp_recv_probe);
> > ^
> > In file included from net/sctp/probe.c:28:0:
> > include/linux/kprobes.h:479:33: note: declared here
> > static inline void __deprecated unregister_jprobe(struct jprobe *p)
> > ^
> >
> > Introduced by commit
> >
> > 590c84593045 ("kprobes: Disable the jprobes APIs")
> >
> > These days we normally don't deprecate things, just remove them. But we
> > do that *after* fixing up all the usages in the tree, please.
>
> OK, should I remove __deprecated or revert above patch?
> I pinged such users but no response. I can just rewrite it but not sure they can reply.
Ideal would be to just fix all these places: convert code where the facility
appears to be actively used, remove code where it looks unused. If maintainers
don't reply, I can apply them to a separate branch in -tip.
For example I'm pretty sure we can just remove the jprobes usage in SCTP.
Thanks,
Ingo
Powered by blists - more mailing lists