| Message ID | 20170609101938.2807152-1-arnd@arndb.de |
|---|---|
| State | Accepted |
| Commit | b040ad9cf6a169cc000a5324fcada695dfa1f4b3 |
| Headers | show |
On 06/09/2017 04:19 AM, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > gcc points out an unusual indentation: > > drivers/block/loop.c: In function 'loop_set_status': > drivers/block/loop.c:1149:3: error: this 'if' clause does not guard... [-Werror=misleading-indentation] > if (figure_loop_size(lo, info->lo_offset, info->lo_sizelimit, > ^~ > drivers/block/loop.c:1152:4: note: ...this statement, but the latter is misleadingly indented as if it were guarded by the 'if' > goto exit; > > This was introduced by a new feature that accidentally moved the opening > braces from one condition to another. Adding a second pair of braces > makes it work correctly again and also more readable. Thanks for fixing this Arnd, I did notice (and complained to Hannes) this yesterday. Added. -- Jens Axboe
On 06/09/2017 12:19 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > gcc points out an unusual indentation: > > drivers/block/loop.c: In function 'loop_set_status': > drivers/block/loop.c:1149:3: error: this 'if' clause does not guard... [-Werror=misleading-indentation] > if (figure_loop_size(lo, info->lo_offset, info->lo_sizelimit, > ^~ > drivers/block/loop.c:1152:4: note: ...this statement, but the latter is misleadingly indented as if it were guarded by the 'if' > goto exit; > > This was introduced by a new feature that accidentally moved the opening > braces from one condition to another. Adding a second pair of braces > makes it work correctly again and also more readable. > > Fixes: f2c6df7dbf9a ("loop: support 4k physical blocksize") > Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> > --- > drivers/block/loop.c | 3 ++- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/block/loop.c b/drivers/block/loop.c > index 4d376c10a97a..e288fb30100f 100644 > --- a/drivers/block/loop.c > +++ b/drivers/block/loop.c > @@ -1147,10 +1147,11 @@ loop_set_status(struct loop_device *lo, const struct loop_info64 *info) > ((lo->lo_flags & LO_FLAGS_BLOCKSIZE) && > lo->lo_logical_blocksize != LO_INFO_BLOCKSIZE(info))) { > if (figure_loop_size(lo, info->lo_offset, info->lo_sizelimit, > - LO_INFO_BLOCKSIZE(info))) > + LO_INFO_BLOCKSIZE(info))) { > err = -EFBIG; > goto exit; > } > + } > > loop_config_discard(lo); > > Oops. You are correct, of course. Reviewed-by: Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.com> Cheers, Hannes -- Dr. Hannes Reinecke zSeries & Storage hare@suse.de +49 911 74053 688 SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg GF: J. Hawn, J. Guild, F. Imendörffer, HRB 16746 (AG Nürnberg)
diff --git a/drivers/block/loop.c b/drivers/block/loop.c index 4d376c10a97a..e288fb30100f 100644 --- a/drivers/block/loop.c +++ b/drivers/block/loop.c @@ -1147,10 +1147,11 @@ loop_set_status(struct loop_device *lo, const struct loop_info64 *info) ((lo->lo_flags & LO_FLAGS_BLOCKSIZE) && lo->lo_logical_blocksize != LO_INFO_BLOCKSIZE(info))) { if (figure_loop_size(lo, info->lo_offset, info->lo_sizelimit, - LO_INFO_BLOCKSIZE(info))) + LO_INFO_BLOCKSIZE(info))) { err = -EFBIG; goto exit; } + } loop_config_discard(lo);
gcc points out an unusual indentation: drivers/block/loop.c: In function 'loop_set_status': drivers/block/loop.c:1149:3: error: this 'if' clause does not guard... [-Werror=misleading-indentation] if (figure_loop_size(lo, info->lo_offset, info->lo_sizelimit, ^~ drivers/block/loop.c:1152:4: note: ...this statement, but the latter is misleadingly indented as if it were guarded by the 'if' goto exit; This was introduced by a new feature that accidentally moved the opening braces from one condition to another. Adding a second pair of braces makes it work correctly again and also more readable. Fixes: f2c6df7dbf9a ("loop: support 4k physical blocksize") Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> --- drivers/block/loop.c | 3 ++- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) -- 2.9.0