On Tue, 2014-10-28 at 10:11 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Mon, 29 Sep 2014 16:08:25 -0700 > Joe Perches <[email protected]> wrote: > > > seq_printf functions shouldn't really check the return value. > > Checking seq_is_full occasionally is used instead. > > > > Update vfs documentation. > > > > Signed-off-by: Joe Perches <[email protected]> > > > > > > -#ifdef CONFIG_PROC_FS > > -static int eventfd_show_fdinfo(struct seq_file *m, struct file *f) > > +static void eventfd_show_fdinfo(struct seq_file *m, struct file *f) > > { > > +#ifdef CONFIG_PROC_FS > > struct eventfd_ctx *ctx = f->private_data; > > - int ret; > > > > spin_lock_irq(&ctx->wqh.lock); > > - ret = seq_printf(m, "eventfd-count: %16llx\n", > > - (unsigned long long)ctx->count); > > + seq_printf(m, "eventfd-count: %16llx\n", > > + (unsigned long long)ctx->count); > > spin_unlock_irq(&ctx->wqh.lock); > > - > > - return ret; > > -} > > #endif > > +} > > > > static const struct file_operations eventfd_fops = { > > -#ifdef CONFIG_PROC_FS > > .show_fdinfo = eventfd_show_fdinfo, > > -#endif > > I wouldn't change logic on this. There's no reason to call this > function if it isn't doing anything. > > I'll change this to just do the update and not change logic like this.
Fewer #ifdefs -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
