[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20200108.132701.1531822898576247637.davem@davemloft.net>
Date: Wed, 08 Jan 2020 13:27:01 -0800 (PST)
From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To: arnd@...db.de
Cc: ktkhai@...tuozzo.com, axboe@...nel.dk, willemb@...gle.com,
deepa.kernel@...il.com, johannes.berg@...el.com,
viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, pctammela@...il.com,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] [net-next] socket: fix unused-function warning
From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Date: Tue, 7 Jan 2020 22:35:59 +0100
> When procfs is disabled, the fdinfo code causes a harmless
> warning:
>
> net/socket.c:1000:13: error: 'sock_show_fdinfo' defined but not used [-Werror=unused-function]
> static void sock_show_fdinfo(struct seq_file *m, struct file *f)
>
> Change the preprocessor conditional to a compiler conditional
> to avoid the warning and let the compiler throw away the
> function itself.
>
> Fixes: b4653342b151 ("net: Allow to show socket-specific information in /proc/[pid]/fdinfo/[fd]")
> Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
This isn't the prettiest thing I've ever seen.
I really think it's nicer to just explicitly put ifdef's around the
forward declaration and the implementation of sock_show_fdinfo().
Alternatively, move the implementation up to the location of the
forward declaration and then you just need one new ifdef guard.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists