On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 03:02:01PM -0800, Guenter Roeck wrote: > On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 11:09:13PM +0100, Bas Peters wrote: > > This patch adds a missing conditional group that has been causing build > > breakages due to undefined struct members being referenced when > > CONFIG_NFSD_v3 is not set. > > > > This patch applies against linux-next. > > > > Signed-off-by: Bas Peters <baspeters93@xxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > fs/nfsd/xdr4.h | 6 ++++-- > > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/fs/nfsd/xdr4.h b/fs/nfsd/xdr4.h > > index 0bda93e..5d1597f 100644 > > --- a/fs/nfsd/xdr4.h > > +++ b/fs/nfsd/xdr4.h > > @@ -630,9 +630,11 @@ void warn_on_nonidempotent_op(struct nfsd4_op *op); > > static inline void > > set_change_info(struct nfsd4_change_info *cinfo, struct svc_fh *fhp) > > { > > + cinfo->change_supported = IS_I_VERSION(fhp->fh_dentry->d_inode); > > + > > +#ifdef CONFIG_NFSD_V3 > > BUG_ON(!fhp->fh_pre_saved); > > cinfo->atomic = fhp->fh_post_saved; > > - cinfo->change_supported = IS_I_VERSION(fhp->fh_dentry->d_inode); > > > > cinfo->before_change = fhp->fh_pre_change; > > cinfo->after_change = fhp->fh_post_change; > > @@ -640,7 +642,7 @@ set_change_info(struct nfsd4_change_info *cinfo, struct svc_fh *fhp) > > cinfo->before_ctime_nsec = fhp->fh_pre_ctime.tv_nsec; > > cinfo->after_ctime_sec = fhp->fh_post_attr.ctime.tv_sec; > > cinfo->after_ctime_nsec = fhp->fh_post_attr.ctime.tv_nsec; > > - > > +#endif > > } > > You'll want to include and example of the build failure in the description, > bisect results after the '---' line, and a Fixes: line pointing to the patch > breaking the build. > > In this case, I am not sure if the above really fixes the problem, > or if it just hides it behind an #ifdef. To determine that, it will > probably be necessary to know which patch actually caused the problem. > This even more true since the code in question was not changed since > around 2010, so making it conditional looks really suspicious. > > In the curent case, I suspect that the problem may have been introduced by > commit 9cf514ccfac ("nfsd: implement pNFS operations"). That is just a guess, > though; I didn't run bisect myself. The key really is to figure out why the > code now fails to build, and not just to comment out the code that is causing > the failure. Yeah, when Jim Davis reported this I took a quick look at the history, didn't see an obvious explanation, and figured well maybe this is just the first time anyone's hit that particular config in a while. Sounds like this actually is a recent regression? --b. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html