Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753161AbZAFDtS (ORCPT ); Mon, 5 Jan 2009 22:49:18 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751286AbZAFDtD (ORCPT ); Mon, 5 Jan 2009 22:49:03 -0500 Received: from mx2.redhat.com ([66.187.237.31]:35192 "EHLO mx2.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751272AbZAFDtB (ORCPT ); Mon, 5 Jan 2009 22:49:01 -0500 Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2009 03:48:45 +0000 From: Alasdair G Kergon To: crquan@gmail.com Cc: Kiyoshi Ueda , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andi Kleen , Mikulas Patocka , device-mapper development , "Jun'ichi Nomura" , Linus Torvalds , Milan Broz Subject: Re: [dm-devel] Re: [git pull] device-mapper patches for 2.6.29 Message-ID: <20090106034845.GD3512@agk.fab.redhat.com> Mail-Followup-To: crquan@gmail.com, Kiyoshi Ueda , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andi Kleen , Mikulas Patocka , device-mapper development , Jun'ichi Nomura , Linus Torvalds , Milan Broz References: <20081010125159.GK5098@agk.fab.redhat.com> <20090105191824.GP5098@agk.fab.redhat.com> <91b13c310901051915i38e05125tb89b3335922d274e@mail.gmail.com> <20090106032118.GC3512@agk.fab.redhat.com> <91b13c310901051932p1343f9eei1db5534e6e10d238@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <91b13c310901051932p1343f9eei1db5534e6e10d238@mail.gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i Organization: Red Hat UK Ltd. Registered in England and Wales, number 03798903. Registered Office: Amberley Place, 107-111 Peascod Street, Windsor, Berkshire, SL4 1TE. Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 975 Lines: 23 On Tue, Jan 06, 2009 at 11:32:51AM +0800, Cheng Renquan (程任全) wrote: > On Tue, Jan 6, 2009 at 11:21 AM, Alasdair G Kergon wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 06, 2009 at 11:15:58AM +0800, Cheng Renquan (程任全) wrote: > >> So now maybe we can add a null macro to module_refcount if > >> CONFIG_MODULE_UNLOAD undefined? > > Do we even need the test at all? > So you mean add "#ifdef CONFIG_MODULE_UNLOAD ..." to dm-target.c? I > can do that, but I really don't know a better solution without > conditional compiling? I mean under what set of circumstances could the test of the module refcount here fail, and if the test was simply removed are there any cases where that would matter? Alasdair -- agk@redhat.com -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/