Re: [PATCH] modules: elide param_lock if !CONFIG_SYSFS

Stephen Rothwell writes: > Hi Rusty, > > On Thu, 25 Jun 2015 17:34:31 -0400 Dan Streetman wrote: >> >> On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 5:18 PM, Rusty Russell wrote: >> > Dan Streetman writes: >> >> Only include the built-in and per-module param_lock, and corresponding >> >> lock/unlock functions, if sy

Re: [PATCH] modules: elide param_lock if !CONFIG_SYSFS

Hi Rusty, On Thu, 25 Jun 2015 17:34:31 -0400 Dan Streetman wrote: > > On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 5:18 PM, Rusty Russell wrote: > > Dan Streetman writes: > >> Only include the built-in and per-module param_lock, and corresponding > >> lock/unlock functions, if sysfs is enabled. If there is no sysf

Re: [PATCH] modules: elide param_lock if !CONFIG_SYSFS

Hi Rusty, On Fri, 26 Jun 2015 06:48:37 +0930 Rusty Russell wrote: > > Dan Streetman writes: > > Only include the built-in and per-module param_lock, and corresponding > > lock/unlock functions, if sysfs is enabled. If there is no sysfs there > > is no need for locking kernel params. > > > > Thi

Re: [PATCH] modules: elide param_lock if !CONFIG_SYSFS

On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 5:18 PM, Rusty Russell wrote: > Dan Streetman writes: >> Only include the built-in and per-module param_lock, and corresponding >> lock/unlock functions, if sysfs is enabled. If there is no sysfs there >> is no need for locking kernel params. >> >> This fixes a build brea

Re: [PATCH] modules: elide param_lock if !CONFIG_SYSFS

Dan Streetman writes: > Only include the built-in and per-module param_lock, and corresponding > lock/unlock functions, if sysfs is enabled. If there is no sysfs there > is no need for locking kernel params. > > This fixes a build break when CONFIG_SYSFS is not enabled, introduced > by commit b51