Messages in this thread Patch in this message |  | | Date | Wed, 19 Sep 2001 21:45:37 -0600 | From | Richard Gooch <> | Subject | [PATCH] for drivers/char/sysrq.c |
| |
Hi, Linus. The appended patch fixes drivers/char/sysrq.c so that it doesn't do a bugus redefine of wakeup_bdflush(), nor attempt to pass arguments to it. The changes in 2.4.10-pre12 broke sysrq.c compiling.
<whinge> How did something this basic get submitted in the first place?!? Doesn't anyone bother compiling patches before sending to Linus? This is the second time today I've had to patch the kernel just to get the rotten thing to compile. I'm not happy that whoever put in those __builtin_expect()'s didn't bother testing with THE RECOMMENDED COMPILER!!! It's not the first time that sort of thing has happened. </whinge>
Regards,
Richard.... Permanent: rgooch@atnf.csiro.au Current: rgooch@ras.ucalgary.ca
--- sysrq.c~ Wed Sep 19 21:25:45 2001 +++ sysrq.c Wed Sep 19 21:37:31 2001 @@ -32,7 +32,6 @@ #include <asm/ptrace.h> -extern void wakeup_bdflush(int); extern void reset_vc(unsigned int); extern struct list_head super_blocks; @@ -221,7 +220,7 @@ static void sysrq_handle_sync(int key, struct pt_regs *pt_regs, struct kbd_struct *kbd, struct tty_struct *tty) { emergency_sync_scheduled = EMERG_SYNC; - wakeup_bdflush(0); + wakeup_bdflush(); } static struct sysrq_key_op sysrq_sync_op = { handler: sysrq_handle_sync, @@ -232,7 +231,7 @@ static void sysrq_handle_mountro(int key, struct pt_regs *pt_regs, struct kbd_struct *kbd, struct tty_struct *tty) { emergency_sync_scheduled = EMERG_REMOUNT; - wakeup_bdflush(0); + wakeup_bdflush(); } static struct sysrq_key_op sysrq_mountro_op = { handler: sysrq_handle_mountro, - 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/
|  |