[PATCH] staging: erofs: remove needless CONFIG_EROFS_FS_SECURITY

[Chao Yu]

On 2019/6/20 17:29, Yue Hu wrote:
> On Thu, 20 Jun 2019 17:22:48 +0800
> Chao Yu <yuchao0 at huawei.com> wrote:
> 
>> On 2019/6/20 16:32, Gao Xiang wrote:
>>> Hi Yue,
>>>
>>> On 2019/6/20 16:30, Yue Hu wrote:  
>>>> From: Yue Hu <huyue2 at yulong.com>
>>>>
>>>> erofs_xattr_security_handler is already marked __maybe_unused, no need
>>>> to add CONFIG_EROFS_FS_SECURITY condition.  
>>
>> CONFIG_EROFS_FS_SECURITY is used as a control switch of erofs security labels
>> feature, but __maybe_unused is to avoid unneeded compiler warning on unused
>> variable, so I think we can't remove it.
> 
> However, erofs_xattr_security_handler will not unused under CONFIG_EROFS_FS_SECURITY
> condition, right?

Yes, we will referred it in erofs_xattr_handlers anyway, so, maybe we can remove
__maybe_unused instead?

Thanks,

> 
> Thx.
> 
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Yue Hu <huyue2 at yulong.com>
>>>> ---
>>>>  drivers/staging/erofs/xattr.c | 2 --
>>>>  1 file changed, 2 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/staging/erofs/xattr.c b/drivers/staging/erofs/xattr.c
>>>> index df40654..06024ac 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/staging/erofs/xattr.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/staging/erofs/xattr.c
>>>> @@ -499,13 +499,11 @@ static int erofs_xattr_generic_get(const struct xattr_handler *handler,
>>>>  	.get	= erofs_xattr_generic_get,
>>>>  };
>>>>  
>>>> -#ifdef CONFIG_EROFS_FS_SECURITY
>>>>  const struct xattr_handler __maybe_unused erofs_xattr_security_handler = {
>>>>  	.prefix	= XATTR_SECURITY_PREFIX,
>>>>  	.flags	= EROFS_XATTR_INDEX_SECURITY,
>>>>  	.get	= erofs_xattr_generic_get,
>>>>  };
>>>> -#endif  
>>>
>>> Thanks for your patch.
>>>
>>> In that case...erofs_xattr_security_handler could be compiled into .rodata section?
>>> I am not sure...
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Gao Xiang
>>>   
>>>>  
>>>>  const struct xattr_handler *erofs_xattr_handlers[] = {
>>>>  	&erofs_xattr_user_handler,
>>>>  
>>> .
>>>   
> 
> .
>