On Sat, 12 Dec 2009, Kay Sievers wrote:
> Ping! Can someone please have a look and comment on that?
> Something like this will now be needed for 2.6.33 to silent a warning.
>
> Thanks,
> Kay
>
> > Cc: Greg KH <greg@xxxxxxxxx>
> > Signed-off-by: Kay Sievers <kay.sievers@xxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > fs/super.c | 2 ++
> > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> >
> > --- a/fs/super.c
> > +++ b/fs/super.c
> > @@ -900,6 +900,8 @@ int get_sb_single(struct file_system_typ
> > deactivate_locked_super(s);
> > return error;
> > }
> > + /* options usually get mangled and can only be parsed once */
> > + data = NULL;
> > s->s_flags |= MS_ACTIVE;
> > }
> > do_remount_sb(s, flags, data, 0);
I think the do_remount_sb() is a NOP in that case. So shouldn't it
rather be
} else {
do_remount_sb(s, flags, data, 0);
}
?
Thanks,
Miklos
--
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
