[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1511026783.10238.2.camel@primarydata.com>
Date: Sat, 18 Nov 2017 17:39:45 +0000
From: Trond Myklebust <trondmy@...marydata.com>
To: "boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com" <boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com>,
"Anna.Schumaker@...app.com" <Anna.Schumaker@...app.com>
CC: "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org" <linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Commit fcd8843c40 breaks old compilers
On Sat, 2017-11-18 at 12:19 -0500, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
> Commit fcd8843c406b46433857ae45e5e9d84b01a7d20b breaks on older
> compilers which cannot process initializers for anonymous structures:
>
> +const nfs4_stateid invalid_stateid = {
> + {
> + .seqid = cpu_to_be32(0xffffffffU),
> + .other = { 0 },
> + },
> + .type = NFS4_INVALID_STATEID_TYPE,
> +};
>
>
> /home/build/linux-linus/fs/nfs/nfs4state.c:74: error: unknown field
> ‘seqid’ specified in initializer
> /home/build/linux-linus/fs/nfs/nfs4state.c:74: warning: missing
> braces
> around initializer
> /home/build/linux-linus/fs/nfs/nfs4state.c:74: warning: (near
> initialization for ‘invalid_stateid.<anonymous>.data’)
> /home/build/linux-linus/fs/nfs/nfs4state.c:74: warning: overflow in
> implicit constant conversion
> /home/build/linux-linus/fs/nfs/nfs4state.c:75: error: unknown field
> ‘other’ specified in initializer
> /home/build/linux-linus/fs/nfs/nfs4state.c:75: error: extra brace
> group
> at end of initializer
> /home/build/linux-linus/fs/nfs/nfs4state.c:75: error: (near
> initialization for ‘invalid_stateid.<anonymous>’)
> /home/build/linux-linus/fs/nfs/nfs4state.c:75: warning: excess
> elements
> in union initializer
> /home/build/linux-linus/fs/nfs/nfs4state.c:75: warning: (near
> initialization for ‘invalid_stateid.<anonymous>’)
> make[4]: *** [fs/nfs/nfs4state.o] Error 1
> make[3]: *** [fs/nfs] Error 2
>
>
> FC-64 <build@...ld-mk2:~> gcc --version
> gcc (GCC) 4.4.4 20100503 (Red Hat 4.4.4-2)
>
>
> A similar bug was fixed by e0714ec4f9efe7b86828b0dcc077fd8f5d8e5e91
> but
> I don't think the same approach can work here.
I don't have any setups with gcc 4.4.4. What is it expecting here? Is
it expecting an extra set of braces due to the anonymous "struct"?
--
Trond Myklebust
Linux NFS client maintainer, PrimaryData
trond.myklebust@...marydata.com
Powered by blists - more mailing lists