On Sun, Jul 23, 2017 at 04:33:36PM +0800, JingPiao Chen wrote: > On Sat, Jul 22, 2017 at 09:53:37PM +0300, Dmitry V. Levin wrote: > > On Sat, Jul 22, 2017 at 08:43:32PM +0800, JingPiao Chen wrote: > [...] > > > diff --git a/defs.h b/defs.h > > > index 4048915..9d99575 100644 > > > --- a/defs.h > > > +++ b/defs.h > > > @@ -711,6 +711,9 @@ typedef bool (*netlink_decoder_t)(struct tcb *, > const struct nlmsghdr *, > > > extern bool \ > > > decode_netlink_ ## name(struct tcb *, const struct nlmsghdr *, \ > > > kernel_ulong_t addr, unsigned int len) > > > +#ifdef HAVE_LINUX_CRYPTOUSER_H > > > +DECL_NETLINK(crypto); > > > +#endif > > > DECL_NETLINK(selinux); > > > DECL_NETLINK(sock_diag); > > > > Why decode_netlink_crypto declaration is ifdef'ed? > > NETLINK_CRYPTO instroduced by linux kernel commit v3.0-7152-ga38f790. > netlink_crypto.c have a global guard, decode_netlink_crypto be compiler > only when have linux/cryptouser.h.
That's clear, but is there any harm in declaring a function that is not going to be defined? -- ldv
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________ Strace-devel mailing list Strace-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/strace-devel
