From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756416Ab0KKMXr (ORCPT ); Thu, 11 Nov 2010 07:23:47 -0500 Received: from kroah.org ([198.145.64.141]:53054 "EHLO coco.kroah.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755759Ab0KKMXq (ORCPT ); Thu, 11 Nov 2010 07:23:46 -0500 Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2010 04:19:17 -0800 From: Greg KH To: Rakib Mullick Cc: LKML , Andrew Morton Subject: Re: [PATCH] fs, sysfs: Change sysfs_pathname function prototype. Message-ID: <20101111121917.GA933@kroah.com> References: <20101109224450.GB21992@kroah.com> <20101110183940.GA15089@kroah.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Nov 11, 2010 at 12:11:34PM +0600, Rakib Mullick wrote: > On Thu, Nov 11, 2010 at 12:39 AM, Greg KH wrote: > > On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 10:53:37AM +0600, Rakib Mullick wrote: > >> On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 4:44 AM, Greg KH wrote: > >> > > >> > If it's really not used then why would marking it inline help out any? > >> > Shouldn't we just delete the function instead? > >> > > >> As far as I can see, its been called recursively and also from > >> sysfs_add_one. Am I missing anything? > > > > If so, then what is the compiler warning that is being generated that > > you are trying to resolve? > > > > Yes - its really confusing. Actually, sysfs_pathname is called from > WARN(). So - when #ifndef WARN is false, then we're having that > problem and sysfs_pathname isn't used that time. So, the proposed > patch isn't the correct fix. Maybe, splitting up the WARN message and > calling sysfs_pathname is the correct one. Am I right? perhaps, yes, that might be correct, but as almost no one builds with WARN not enabled, is this a real issue? thanks, greg k-h