linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: build warning after merge of the xfs tree

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Date:   Thu, 31 Aug 2017 06:30:41 -0400
From:   Brian Foster <bfoster@...hat.com>
To:     Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc:     "Darrick J. Wong" <darrick.wong@...cle.com>,
        David Chinner <david@...morbit.com>, linux-xfs@...r.kernel.org,
        Linux-Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: build warning after merge of the xfs tree

On Thu, Aug 31, 2017 at 10:07:03AM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> After merging the xfs tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc
> ppc64_defconfig) produced this warning:
> 
> fs/xfs/xfs_buf_item.c: In function 'xfs_buf_item_unlock':
> fs/xfs/xfs_buf_item.c:573:9: warning: unused variable 'ordered' [-Wunused-variable]
>   bool   ordered = !!(bip->bli_flags & XFS_BLI_ORDERED);
>          ^
> 
> Introduced by commit
> 
>   a097077ef708 ("xfs: remove unnecessary dirty bli format check for ordered bufs")
> 

Ugh, this is due to the refactoring of this patch between v1 and v2. I
specifically recall testing for this in v1 because I added the ordered
bool purely to clean up the ASSERT(), then I apparently lost of track of
it for v2.

Anyways.. Christoph, Darrick, preferences to clean this up..? I have no
preference between the v1 or v2 factoring. Or if it's easier, we could
always just drop something like the hunk below on top. Thoughts?

Brian

--- 8< ---

diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_buf_item.c b/fs/xfs/xfs_buf_item.c
index ef2c137..f5d25f5 100644
--- a/fs/xfs/xfs_buf_item.c
+++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_buf_item.c
@@ -567,10 +567,15 @@ xfs_buf_item_unlock(
 {
 	struct xfs_buf_log_item	*bip = BUF_ITEM(lip);
 	struct xfs_buf		*bp = bip->bli_buf;
-	bool			aborted = !!(lip->li_flags & XFS_LI_ABORTED);
-	bool			hold = !!(bip->bli_flags & XFS_BLI_HOLD);
-	bool			dirty = !!(bip->bli_flags & XFS_BLI_DIRTY);
-	bool			ordered = !!(bip->bli_flags & XFS_BLI_ORDERED);
+	bool			aborted;
+	bool			hold;
+	bool			dirty;
+	bool			ordered;
+
+	aborted = !!(lip->li_flags & XFS_LI_ABORTED);
+	hold = !!(bip->bli_flags & XFS_BLI_HOLD);
+	dirty = !!(bip->bli_flags & XFS_BLI_DIRTY);
+	ordered = !!(bip->bli_flags & XFS_BLI_ORDERED);
 
 	/* Clear the buffer's association with this transaction. */
 	bp->b_transp = NULL;