| To: | "Randy.Dunlap" <rddunlap@xxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: patches for PROC_FS=n (2.6.0-test7) |
| From: | "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Sat, 11 Oct 2003 12:08:52 -0700 |
| Cc: | linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <20031010141646.779f10bb.rddunlap@osdl.org> |
| References: | <20031010141646.779f10bb.rddunlap@osdl.org> |
| Sender: | netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
On Fri, 10 Oct 2003 14:16:46 -0700 "Randy.Dunlap" <rddunlap@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > http://developer.osdl.org/rddunlap/patches/atmprocfs_260t7.patch How can this be needed? When procfs is disabled then remove_proc_entry() is defined as "do { } while (0)", ie. a nop. |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: [PATCH] Handle shared SKBs in VLAN receive code, David S. Miller |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: [PATCH] hostess -- return value check for register_netdev, David S. Miller |
| Previous by Thread: | patches for PROC_FS=n (2.6.0-test7), Randy.Dunlap |
| Next by Thread: | Re: patches for PROC_FS=n (2.6.0-test7), Sam Ravnborg |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |