[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAE-0n51T9ZGADCk6LaKJdnQwPvMCawSvjwUP+AF0hFohAFom0A@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2021 22:03:55 -0700
From: Stephen Boyd <swboyd@...omium.org>
To: Xin He <hexin.op@...edance.com>, keescook@...omium.org,
tglx@...utronix.de
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] debugobjects: add missing empty function debug_object_active_state()
Quoting Xin He (2021-06-17 00:10:27)
> All other functions are defined for when CONFIG_DEBUG_OBJECTS
> is not set.
>
> Signed-off-by: Xin He <hexin.op@...edance.com>
> ---
> include/linux/debugobjects.h | 3 +++
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/debugobjects.h b/include/linux/debugobjects.h
> index 8d2dde23e9fb..af0d73d8d29b 100644
> --- a/include/linux/debugobjects.h
> +++ b/include/linux/debugobjects.h
> @@ -99,6 +99,9 @@ static inline void
> debug_object_free (void *addr, const struct debug_obj_descr *descr) { }
> static inline void
> debug_object_assert_init(void *addr, const struct debug_obj_descr *descr) { }
> +static inline void
> +debug_object_active_state(void *addr, const struct debug_obj_descr *descr,
> + unsigned int expect, unsigned int next) { }
I suppose it's a landmine that may go off at some point, but this isn't
fixing anything that's broken at the moment, correct?
>
> static inline void debug_objects_early_init(void) { }
> static inline void debug_objects_mem_init(void) { }
Powered by blists - more mailing lists