On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 12:20 AM, Luis R. Rodriguez <mcgrof@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 05:00:09PM +0100, Jan Tulak wrote:
>> The old name 'defaultval' was misleading - it is not the default value,
>> but the value the option has when used as a flag by an user.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Jan Tulak <jtulak@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> --- a/mkfs/xfs_mkfs.c
>> +++ b/mkfs/xfs_mkfs.c
>> @@ -189,7 +189,7 @@ unsigned int sectorsize;
>> @@ -223,7 +223,7 @@ struct opt_params {
>> } conflicts [MAX_CONFLICTS];
>> long long minval;
>> long long maxval;
>> - long long defaultval;
>> + long long flagval;
>
> David suggested that in the future the config value(mkfs.xfs.conf) will override
> the defaultval, in this case since you are renaming this, just want to be sure
> the new name we choose can fit its later use also with the config. Perhaps
> userval ?
>
> Luis
Your question is exactly why I'm renaming it. :-) This is not the
value that is used when no option is passed, but when an option
doesn't have an argument. So we don't require "-m crc=0|1", but "-m
crc" is enough.
Jan
--
Jan Tulak
jtulak@xxxxxxxxxx / jan@xxxxxxxx
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-xfs" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
