On 12/19/17 7:56 PM, Dave Chinner wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 06:59:58PM -0800, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
>> On Mon, Dec 18, 2017 at 08:11:57PM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
>>> From: Dave Chinner <dchinner@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>>
>>> Now we have a two dimensional conflict array, convert the sector
>>> size CLI option conflict determination to use it. To get the error
>>> specification just right, we also need to tweak how we store
>>> and validate the sector size CLI parameter state in the options
>>> table.
>>>
>>> Old:
>>>
>>> $ mkfs.xfs -N -s size=4k -d sectsize=512 /dev/pmem0
>>> Cannot specify both -d sectsize and -d sectlog
>>> .....
>>>
>>> New:
>>>
>>> $ mkfs.xfs -N -s size=4k -d sectsize=512 /dev/pmem0
>>> Cannot specify both -s size and -d sectsize
>>> .....
> ....
>>> @@ -964,8 +991,8 @@ conflict(
>>> int conflict)
>>> {
>>> fprintf(stderr, _("Cannot specify both -%c %s and -%c %s\n"),
>>> - opts->name, opts->subopts[option],
>>> - con_opts->name, con_opts->subopts[conflict]);
>>> + con_opts->name, con_opts->subopts[conflict],
>>> + opts->name, opts->subopts[option]);
>>
>> Why is it necessary to change this around? Surely
>>
>> Cannot specify both -s barfu and -d fubar
>>
>> and
>>
>> Cannot specify both -d fubar and -s barfu
>>
>> aren't /that/ much different?
>>
>> Or is this one of those things that fixes up an xfstest or something?
>
> Ummm, that might be a stray hunk of code. if it's necessary it
> should be in the original patch that changed this error message, not
> in this patch.
>
> I'll have to go check. Too hot here to think right now.
Let me know what to do about this, I can just drop the hunk unless
you decided there's a reason for it.
-eric
--
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
