On Thu, 20 Jun 2019 16:32:01 +0800 Gao Xiang <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi Yue, > > On 2019/6/20 16:30, Yue Hu wrote: > > From: Yue Hu <[email protected]> > > > > erofs_xattr_security_handler is already marked __maybe_unused, no need > > to add CONFIG_EROFS_FS_SECURITY condition. > > > > Signed-off-by: Yue Hu <[email protected]> > > --- > > drivers/staging/erofs/xattr.c | 2 -- > > 1 file changed, 2 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/staging/erofs/xattr.c b/drivers/staging/erofs/xattr.c > > index df40654..06024ac 100644 > > --- a/drivers/staging/erofs/xattr.c > > +++ b/drivers/staging/erofs/xattr.c > > @@ -499,13 +499,11 @@ static int erofs_xattr_generic_get(const struct > > xattr_handler *handler, > > .get = erofs_xattr_generic_get, > > }; > > > > -#ifdef CONFIG_EROFS_FS_SECURITY > > const struct xattr_handler __maybe_unused erofs_xattr_security_handler = { > > .prefix = XATTR_SECURITY_PREFIX, > > .flags = EROFS_XATTR_INDEX_SECURITY, > > .get = erofs_xattr_generic_get, > > }; > > -#endif > > Thanks for your patch. > > In that case...erofs_xattr_security_handler could be compiled into .rodata > section? > I am not sure... Yes, just like erofs_xattr_user_handler as below in System.map. ffffffff820ec2a0 R erofs_xattr_security_handler ffffffff820ec2e0 R erofs_xattr_trusted_handler ffffffff820ec320 R erofs_xattr_user_handler Thx. > > Thanks, > Gao Xiang > > > > > const struct xattr_handler *erofs_xattr_handlers[] = { > > &erofs_xattr_user_handler, > >
