Re: linux-next: Tree for January 31 (ip_vs)

5 messages, 3 authors, 2011-02-01 · open the first message on its own page

Re: linux-next: Tree for January 31 (ip_vs)

From: Randy Dunlap <hidden>
Date: 2011-01-31 18:19:09

On Mon, 31 Jan 2011 17:41:13 +1100 Stephen Rothwell wrote:
Hi all,

Changes since 20110121:

The net tree lost its build failure.

When CONFIG_SYSCTL is not enabled:

net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_core.c:1891: warning: format '%lu' expects type 'long unsigned int', but argument 2 has type 'unsigned int'
ERROR: "unregister_net_sysctl_table" [net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs.ko] undefined!
ERROR: "register_net_sysctl_table" [net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs.ko] undefined!


---
~Randy
*** Remember to use Documentation/SubmitChecklist when testing your code ***

Re: linux-next: Tree for January 31 (ip_vs)

From: Simon Horman <horms@verge.net.au>
Date: 2011-01-31 21:18:52

On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 10:18:29AM -0800, Randy Dunlap wrote:
On Mon, 31 Jan 2011 17:41:13 +1100 Stephen Rothwell wrote:
quoted
Hi all,

Changes since 20110121:

The net tree lost its build failure.

When CONFIG_SYSCTL is not enabled:

net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_core.c:1891: warning: format '%lu' expects type 'long unsigned int', but argument 2 has type 'unsigned int'
ERROR: "unregister_net_sysctl_table" [net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs.ko] undefined!
ERROR: "register_net_sysctl_table" [net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs.ko] undefined!
Thanks, I'm looking into it.

Re: linux-next: Tree for January 31 (ip_vs)

From: Simon Horman <horms@verge.net.au>
Date: 2011-01-31 22:57:34

On Tue, Feb 01, 2011 at 08:18:47AM +1100, Simon Horman wrote:
On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 10:18:29AM -0800, Randy Dunlap wrote:
quoted
On Mon, 31 Jan 2011 17:41:13 +1100 Stephen Rothwell wrote:
quoted
Hi all,

Changes since 20110121:

The net tree lost its build failure.

When CONFIG_SYSCTL is not enabled:

net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_core.c:1891: warning: format '%lu' expects type 'long unsigned int', but argument 2 has type 'unsigned int'
ERROR: "unregister_net_sysctl_table" [net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs.ko] undefined!
ERROR: "register_net_sysctl_table" [net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs.ko] undefined!
Thanks, I'm looking into it.
On a related note, does IPVS need to handle the case
where CONFIG_PROC_FS is not enabled?

Re: linux-next: Tree for January 31 (ip_vs)

From: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Date: 2011-01-31 22:59:58

From: Simon Horman <horms@verge.net.au>
Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2011 09:57:28 +1100
On Tue, Feb 01, 2011 at 08:18:47AM +1100, Simon Horman wrote:
quoted
On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 10:18:29AM -0800, Randy Dunlap wrote:
quoted
On Mon, 31 Jan 2011 17:41:13 +1100 Stephen Rothwell wrote:
quoted
Hi all,

Changes since 20110121:

The net tree lost its build failure.

When CONFIG_SYSCTL is not enabled:

net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_core.c:1891: warning: format '%lu' expects type 'long unsigned int', but argument 2 has type 'unsigned int'
ERROR: "unregister_net_sysctl_table" [net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs.ko] undefined!
ERROR: "register_net_sysctl_table" [net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs.ko] undefined!
Thanks, I'm looking into it.
On a related note, does IPVS need to handle the case
where CONFIG_PROC_FS is not enabled?
Yes.

Re: linux-next: Tree for January 31 (ip_vs)

From: Simon Horman <horms@verge.net.au>
Date: 2011-02-01 00:03:14

On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 03:00:31PM -0800, David Miller wrote:
From: Simon Horman <horms@verge.net.au>
Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2011 09:57:28 +1100
quoted
On Tue, Feb 01, 2011 at 08:18:47AM +1100, Simon Horman wrote:
quoted
On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 10:18:29AM -0800, Randy Dunlap wrote:
quoted
On Mon, 31 Jan 2011 17:41:13 +1100 Stephen Rothwell wrote:
quoted
Hi all,

Changes since 20110121:

The net tree lost its build failure.

When CONFIG_SYSCTL is not enabled:

net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_core.c:1891: warning: format '%lu' expects type 'long unsigned int', but argument 2 has type 'unsigned int'
ERROR: "unregister_net_sysctl_table" [net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs.ko] undefined!
ERROR: "register_net_sysctl_table" [net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs.ko] undefined!
Thanks, I'm looking into it.
On a related note, does IPVS need to handle the case
where CONFIG_PROC_FS is not enabled?
Yes.
Thanks.

I checked and it does seem to compile without CONFIG_PROC_FS
and now also without CONFIG_SYSCTL, I'll send a patch for that right
after I finish this email.

I think that in both cases there is dead code, I'll clean that up next.
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help