On Tue, Feb 09, 2016 at 01:57:09PM -0600, Eric Sandeen wrote: > On 2/9/16 1:55 PM, Dave Chinner wrote: > > On Tue, Feb 09, 2016 at 11:40:57AM -0600, Eric Sandeen wrote: > >> After 334e580, > >> fs: XFS_IOC_FS[SG]SETXATTR to FS_IOC_FS[SG]ETXATTR promotion > >> > >> the file include/linux/fs.h now defines struct fsxattr. > >> > >> It defines FS_IOC_FSGETXATTR as well, so use that to wrap > >> our local definition, and skip it if the kernel is providing > >> it so that we don't get multiple definitions. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxx> > >> --- > >> > >> Should the kernel also #define HAVE_FSXATTR to help existing > >> xfsprogs-devel installations? > >> > >> (And what if headers are included in the other order? Should > >> we try to guard on the kernel side or no?) > > > > I've already sent a patch to fix this - it was with the foreign > > filesystem xfs_quota patch.... > > Oh, sorry, spaced it. > > What do you think of the HAVE_FSXATTR definition in fs.h? Which fs.h? The include/linux/fs.h file does not have such guards... Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
