Lee Jones
2012-Nov-03 22:02 UTC
[Bridge] [PATCH 9/9] Avoid 'statement with no effect' compiler warnings
Instead of issuing (0) statements when !CONFIG_SYSFS which will cause 'warning: ', we'll use inline statements instead. This will effectively do the same thing, but suppress any unnecessary warnings. Cc: Stephen Hemminger <shemminger at vyatta.com> Cc: bridge at lists.linux-foundation.org Cc: netdev at vger.kernel.org Signed-off-by: Lee Jones <lee.jones at linaro.org> --- net/bridge/br_private.h | 8 ++++---- 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) diff --git a/net/bridge/br_private.h b/net/bridge/br_private.h index 9b278c4..af5f584 100644 --- a/net/bridge/br_private.h +++ b/net/bridge/br_private.h @@ -566,10 +566,10 @@ extern void br_sysfs_delbr(struct net_device *dev); #else -#define br_sysfs_addif(p) (0) -#define br_sysfs_renameif(p) (0) -#define br_sysfs_addbr(dev) (0) -#define br_sysfs_delbr(dev) do { } while(0) +static inline int br_sysfs_addif(struct net_bridge_port *p) { return 0; } +static inline int br_sysfs_renameif(struct net_bridge_port *p) { return 0; } +static inline int br_sysfs_addbr(struct net_device *dev) { return 0; } +static inline void br_sysfs_delbr(struct net_device *dev) { return; } #endif /* CONFIG_SYSFS */ #endif -- 1.7.9.5
David Miller
2012-Nov-04 06:00 UTC
[Bridge] [PATCH 9/9] Avoid 'statement with no effect' compiler warnings
From: Lee Jones <lee.jones at linaro.org> Date: Sat, 3 Nov 2012 23:02:30 +0100> Instead of issuing (0) statements when !CONFIG_SYSFS which will cause > 'warning: ', we'll use inline statements instead. This will effectively > do the same thing, but suppress any unnecessary warnings. > > Cc: Stephen Hemminger <shemminger at vyatta.com> > Cc: bridge at lists.linux-foundation.org > Cc: netdev at vger.kernel.org > Signed-off-by: Lee Jones <lee.jones at linaro.org>Applied, but please use more informative subject lines. You should prefix your subject line after [PATCH ...] with the name of the subsystem you are touching, a ": " then the headline description. So here you would have used "bridge: " and that's what I added when I commited this patch.
Apparently Analagous Threads
- [Bridge] [PATCH net-next v5] bridge: export multicast database via netlink
- [Bridge] [PATCH net-next v3] bridge: export multicast database via netlink
- [Bridge] RFC: [PATCH] bridge vlan integration
- [Bridge] [PATCH net-next v4] bridge: export multicast database via netlink
- [Bridge] [RFC PATCH 0/2] Allow full bridge configuration via sysfs