linux-kernel - [PATCH 1/1] drivers/staging: Fixed sparse error "directive in argument list"

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Sat, 11 Oct 2014 20:13:42 +0100
From:	Filipe Gonçalves <filipe@...inghighway.com>
To:	oleg.drokin@...el.com, andreas.dilger@...el.com,
	gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, devel@...verdev.osuosl.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:	Filipe Gonçalves <filipe@...inghighway.com>
Subject: [PATCH 1/1] drivers/staging: Fixed sparse error "directive in argument list"

This patch fixes a sparse warning on layout.c (ptlrpc) that was caused by having preprocessor directives in the arguments to a macro.

Signed-off-by: Filipe Gonçalves <filipe@...inghighway.com>
---
 drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/ptlrpc/layout.c | 7 +++++--
 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/ptlrpc/layout.c b/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/ptlrpc/layout.c
index 5b83371..211df78 100644
--- a/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/ptlrpc/layout.c
+++ b/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/ptlrpc/layout.c
@@ -978,10 +978,11 @@ struct req_msg_field RMF_CONN =
 EXPORT_SYMBOL(RMF_CONN);
 
 struct req_msg_field RMF_CONNECT_DATA =
+#if LUSTRE_VERSION_CODE > OBD_OCD_VERSION(2, 7, 50, 0)
 	DEFINE_MSGF("cdata",
 		    RMF_F_NO_SIZE_CHECK /* we allow extra space for interop */,
-#if LUSTRE_VERSION_CODE > OBD_OCD_VERSION(2, 7, 50, 0)
 		    sizeof(struct obd_connect_data),
+		    lustre_swab_connect, NULL);
 #else
 /* For interoperability with 1.8 and 2.0 clients/servers.
  * The RPC verification code allows larger RPC buffers, but not
@@ -990,9 +991,11 @@ struct req_msg_field RMF_CONNECT_DATA =
  * size is at least as large as obd_connect_data_v1.  That is not
  * not in itself harmful, since the chance of just corrupting this
  * field is low.  See JIRA LU-16 for details. */
+	DEFINE_MSGF("cdata",
+		    RMF_F_NO_SIZE_CHECK /* we allow extra space for interop */,
 		    sizeof(struct obd_connect_data_v1),
-#endif
 		    lustre_swab_connect, NULL);
+#endif
 EXPORT_SYMBOL(RMF_CONNECT_DATA);
 
 struct req_msg_field RMF_DLM_REQ =
-- 
1.9.1

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/