* [PATCH -mm] fs: define file_fsync() even for CONFIG_BLOCK=n
@ 2007-09-12 2:06 Paul Mundt
2007-09-12 9:30 ` Christoph Hellwig
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Paul Mundt @ 2007-09-12 2:06 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Andrew Morton; +Cc: linux-kernel
There's nothing that is problematic for file_fsync() with CONFIG_BLOCK=n,
and it's built in unconditionally anyways, so move the prototype out to
reflect that. Without this, the unionfs build bails out.
CC fs/unionfs/file.o
fs/unionfs/file.c:148: error: 'file_fsync' undeclared here (not in a function)
make[2]: *** [fs/unionfs/file.o] Error 1
make[2]: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs....
make[1]: *** [fs/unionfs] Error 2
Signed-off-by: Paul Mundt <lethal@linux-sh.org>
--
include/linux/buffer_head.h | 3 ++-
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
--- linux-2.6.23-rc4-mm1.orig/include/linux/buffer_head.h 2007-09-11 15:15:56.000000000 +0900
+++ linux-2.6.23-rc4-mm1/include/linux/buffer_head.h 2007-09-12 10:18:57.000000000 +0900
@@ -14,6 +14,8 @@
#include <linux/wait.h>
#include <asm/atomic.h>
+int file_fsync(struct file *, struct dentry *, int);
+
#ifdef CONFIG_BLOCK
enum bh_state_bits {
@@ -225,7 +227,6 @@
sector_t generic_block_bmap(struct address_space *, sector_t, get_block_t *);
int generic_commit_write(struct file *, struct page *, unsigned, unsigned);
int block_truncate_page(struct address_space *, loff_t, get_block_t *);
-int file_fsync(struct file *, struct dentry *, int);
int nobh_prepare_write(struct page*, unsigned, unsigned, get_block_t*);
int nobh_commit_write(struct file *, struct page *, unsigned, unsigned);
int nobh_truncate_page(struct address_space *, loff_t);
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH -mm] fs: define file_fsync() even for CONFIG_BLOCK=n
2007-09-12 2:06 [PATCH -mm] fs: define file_fsync() even for CONFIG_BLOCK=n Paul Mundt
@ 2007-09-12 9:30 ` Christoph Hellwig
2007-09-12 23:27 ` Josef Sipek
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Christoph Hellwig @ 2007-09-12 9:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Paul Mundt, Andrew Morton, linux-kernel
On Wed, Sep 12, 2007 at 11:06:10AM +0900, Paul Mundt wrote:
> There's nothing that is problematic for file_fsync() with CONFIG_BLOCK=n,
> and it's built in unconditionally anyways, so move the prototype out to
> reflect that. Without this, the unionfs build bails out.
Unionfs should stop using it instead.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH -mm] fs: define file_fsync() even for CONFIG_BLOCK=n
2007-09-12 9:30 ` Christoph Hellwig
@ 2007-09-12 23:27 ` Josef Sipek
0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Josef Sipek @ 2007-09-12 23:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Christoph Hellwig, Paul Mundt, Andrew Morton, linux-kernel
On Wed, Sep 12, 2007 at 10:30:20AM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 12, 2007 at 11:06:10AM +0900, Paul Mundt wrote:
> > There's nothing that is problematic for file_fsync() with CONFIG_BLOCK=n,
> > and it's built in unconditionally anyways, so move the prototype out to
> > reflect that. Without this, the unionfs build bails out.
>
> Unionfs should stop using it instead.
We did stop.
Josef 'Jeff' Sipek.
--
NT is to UNIX what a doughnut is to a particle accelerator.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2007-09-12 23:28 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2007-09-12 2:06 [PATCH -mm] fs: define file_fsync() even for CONFIG_BLOCK=n Paul Mundt
2007-09-12 9:30 ` Christoph Hellwig
2007-09-12 23:27 ` Josef Sipek
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®