On Mon, Sep 29, 2008 at 01:06:23PM -0400, David P. Quigley wrote:
[...]
>
> + if (dom->flavour != &svcauth_unix
> +#ifdef CONFIG_SECURITY
> + && dom->flavour != &svcauth_seclabel
> +#endif
> + )
> if (dom->flavour != &svcauth_unix)
> return -EINVAL;
> udom = container_of(dom, struct unix_domain, h);
> @@ -873,3 +889,80 @@ struct auth_ops svcauth_unix = {
> .set_client = svcauth_unix_set_client,
> };
checkpatch picked up on a suspect code indent for this hunk. It is
unhappy about the second if expecting it to be indented. By the looks
of this I am suspecting a miss-merge of the change in this function and
the second if should have been removed. To my reading it actually still
does the right thing but ...
-apw
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
