[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20161016164556.GA30222@infradead.org>
Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2016 09:45:56 -0700
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To: kbuild test robot <fengguang.wu@...el.com>, jonas@...thpole.se
Cc: Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>, kbuild-all@...org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: fs/xfs/xfs_ondisk.h:96:2: error: call to
'__compiletime_assert_96' declared with attribute error: XFS:
sizeof(xfs_dir2_sf_entry_t) is wrong, expected 3
> head: 1001354ca34179f3db924eb66672442a173147dc
That's Linux 4.9-rc1
> 30cbc591 Darrick J. Wong 2016-03-09 @86 XFS_CHECK_STRUCT_SIZE(xfs_dir2_data_unused_t, 6);
But that's not how xfs_ondisk.h in 4.9-rc1 looks like
> 30cbc591 Darrick J. Wong 2016-03-09 @96 XFS_CHECK_STRUCT_SIZE(xfs_dir2_sf_entry_t, 3);
And that's line 119.
Something is odd about this report.
But both xfs_dir2_data_unused_t and xfs_dir2_sf_entry_t have one thing in
common: they are strutures that aren't padded to a natural alignment at
the end. It seems like the openrisc gcc does implicit padding for them,
which sounds like a nightmware waiting to happen for any sort of disk
or network structure, so I'm really not sure if we should work around
it in xfs.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists