Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2011 21:03:51 +0300 From: Aleksandr Rybalko <ray@ddteam.net> To: Ryan Stone <rysto32@gmail.com> Cc: Aleksandr Rybalko <ray@dlink.ua>, "freebsd-current@freebsd.org" <freebsd-current@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Fix softdep_request_cleanup difference w/ and w/o SOFTUPDATES Message-ID: <20110328210351.f4413f2a.ray@ddteam.net> In-Reply-To: <AANLkTinB20FEPrDrc4G6%2Bse_hmyKpzCAe5_9JHa0FH2N@mail.gmail.com> References: <20110328131903.6bf2bc62.ray@dlink.ua> <AANLkTinB20FEPrDrc4G6%2Bse_hmyKpzCAe5_9JHa0FH2N@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 28 Mar 2011 11:32:12 -0400
Ryan Stone <rysto32@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 28, 2011 at 6:19 AM, Aleksandr Rybalko <ray@dlink.ua>
> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I found a difference of definition softdep_request_cleanup.
> > when SOFTUPDATES undefined softdep_request_cleanup take only two
> > arguments.
> >
> > Patch to fix this:
> >
> > Index: sys/ufs/ffs/ffs_softdep.c
> > ===================================================================
> > --- sys/ufs/ffs/ffs_softdep.c š (revision 220095)
> > +++ sys/ufs/ffs/ffs_softdep.c š (working copy)
> > @@ -514,9 +514,10 @@
> > š}
> >
> > šint
> > -softdep_request_cleanup(fs, vp)
> > +softdep_request_cleanup(fs, vp, resource)
> > š š š šstruct fs *fs;
> > š š š šstruct vnode *vp;
> > + š š š int resource;
> > š{
> >
> > š š š šreturn (0);
>
> If we need to change the definition, shouldn't we convert it to a C89
> declaration at the same time?
Yeah, I agree with you, but think peoples who made nice things for UFS
have they own plan what to do with this.
I only fix problem for building without SOFTUPDATES flag set.
BTW, if someone interest I can convert all declaration of this file to
C89 :)
--
Aleksandr Rybalko <ray@ddteam.net>
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20110328210351.f4413f2a.ray>