Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 18 Feb 2000 00:46:06 -0500 | From | Chris Kloiber <> | Subject | [Fwd: 2.3.46 ll_rw_blk.c (Another minor fix- 'contiNUe')] |
| |
William Stearns wrote: > > Good evening, Andrea and Linus, > It looks like there might be a minor typo in > ll_rw_blk.c; "back_merges_fn" instead of "back_merge_fn". > > gcc -D__KERNEL__ -I/usr/src/linux-2.3.46/include -Wall -Wstrict-prototypes > -O2 -fomit-frame-pointer -fno-strict-aliasing -pipe -DCPU=586 > -march=i586 -DEXPORT_SYMTAB -c ll_rw_blk.c > ll_rw_blk.c:237: warning: static declaration for `generic_plug_device' follows non-static > ll_rw_blk.c: In function `blk_init_queue': > ll_rw_blk.c:256: structure has no member named `back_merges_fn' > ll_rw_blk.c: In function `generic_make_request': > ll_rw_blk.c:682: warning: `__entry' might be used uninitialized in this function > ll_rw_blk.c:950: warning: `entry' might be used uninitialized in this function > ll_rw_blk.c:566: warning: `entry' might be used uninitialized in this function > > I'm not sure this is correct, but: > > diff -u linux/drivers/block/ll_rw_blk.c.orig linux/drivers/block/ll_rw_blk.c > --- linux/drivers/block/ll_rw_blk.c.orig Wed Feb 16 20:15:56 2000 > +++ linux/drivers/block/ll_rw_blk.c Wed Feb 16 20:45:56 2000 > @@ -253,7 +253,7 @@ > INIT_LIST_HEAD(&q->queue_head); > q->elevator = ELEVATOR_DEFAULTS; > q->request_fn = rfn; > - q->back_merges_fn = ll_back_merge_fn; > + q->back_merge_fn = ll_back_merge_fn; > q->front_merge_fn = ll_front_merge_fn; > q->merge_requests_fn = ll_merge_requests_fn; > q->make_request_fn = NULL; > > Cheers, > - Bill > > --------------------------------------------------------------------------- > The Web is a four-year-old, endlessly yammering, "Look what I can do!" > (Courtesy of Hank Leininger <hlein@progressive-comp.com>) > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- > William Stearns (wstearns@pobox.com). Mason, Buildkernel, named2hosts, > and ipfwadm2ipchains are at: http://www.pobox.com/~wstearns/ > --------------------------------------------------------------------------
After you fix that, it will die again if you don't fix the 'contiNUe' later in the same module. It should be 'continue' of course, but I don't know how to create a patch. Heck, I can't even write code. I wouldn't have even mentioned it, but I haven't seen anyone else do so.
Chris Kloiber
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |