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;
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-next" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
