From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752562AbaJKTNz (ORCPT ); Sat, 11 Oct 2014 15:13:55 -0400 Received: from mail-wg0-f52.google.com ([74.125.82.52]:39837 "EHLO mail-wg0-f52.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751147AbaJKTNy (ORCPT ); Sat, 11 Oct 2014 15:13:54 -0400 From: =?UTF-8?q?Filipe=20Gon=C3=A7alves?= To: oleg.drokin@intel.com, andreas.dilger@intel.com, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, devel@driverdev.osuosl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Cc: =?UTF-8?q?Filipe=20Gon=C3=A7alves?= Subject: [PATCH 1/1] drivers/staging: Fixed sparse error "directive in argument list" Date: Sat, 11 Oct 2014 20:13:42 +0100 Message-Id: <1413054822-7894-1-git-send-email-filipe@codinghighway.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 1.9.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org This patch fixes a sparse warning on layout.c (ptlrpc) that was caused by having preprocessor directives in the arguments to a macro. Signed-off-by: Filipe Gonçalves --- drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/ptlrpc/layout.c | 7 +++++-- 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/ptlrpc/layout.c b/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/ptlrpc/layout.c index 5b83371..211df78 100644 --- a/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/ptlrpc/layout.c +++ b/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/ptlrpc/layout.c @@ -978,10 +978,11 @@ struct req_msg_field RMF_CONN = EXPORT_SYMBOL(RMF_CONN); struct req_msg_field RMF_CONNECT_DATA = +#if LUSTRE_VERSION_CODE > OBD_OCD_VERSION(2, 7, 50, 0) DEFINE_MSGF("cdata", RMF_F_NO_SIZE_CHECK /* we allow extra space for interop */, -#if LUSTRE_VERSION_CODE > OBD_OCD_VERSION(2, 7, 50, 0) sizeof(struct obd_connect_data), + lustre_swab_connect, NULL); #else /* For interoperability with 1.8 and 2.0 clients/servers. * The RPC verification code allows larger RPC buffers, but not @@ -990,9 +991,11 @@ struct req_msg_field RMF_CONNECT_DATA = * size is at least as large as obd_connect_data_v1. That is not * not in itself harmful, since the chance of just corrupting this * field is low. See JIRA LU-16 for details. */ + DEFINE_MSGF("cdata", + RMF_F_NO_SIZE_CHECK /* we allow extra space for interop */, sizeof(struct obd_connect_data_v1), -#endif lustre_swab_connect, NULL); +#endif EXPORT_SYMBOL(RMF_CONNECT_DATA); struct req_msg_field RMF_DLM_REQ = -- 1.9.1