Re: cifs: suggestions for a few more sparse warnings

["Shirish Pargaonkar" <shirishpargaonkar@gmail.com>]

Steve,

On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 8:39 PM, Steve French <smfrench@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 7:55 PM, Harvey Harrison
> <harvey.harrison@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Here's a patch for some of the other warnings, but the cifsacl.c bit
>> needs a comment I think.
>>
>> Harvey
>>
>> diff --git a/fs/cifs/cifsacl.c b/fs/cifs/cifsacl.c
>> index 34902cf..70f0ef5 100644
>> --- a/fs/cifs/cifsacl.c
>> +++ b/fs/cifs/cifsacl.c
>> @@ -169,8 +169,7 @@ static void copy_sec_desc(const struct cifs_ntsd *pntsd,
>>        for (i = 0; i < 6; i++)
>>                ngroup_sid_ptr->authority[i] = group_sid_ptr->authority[i];
>>        for (i = 0; i < 5; i++)
>> -               ngroup_sid_ptr->sub_auth[i] =
>> -                               cpu_to_le32(group_sid_ptr->sub_auth[i]);
>> +               cpu_to_le32s(&group_sid_ptr->sub_auth[i]);
>>
>>        return;
>>  }
>
> No - the cifsacl one looks like just a bug - there should not be an
> endian conversion here.
>

I think you are right, there should not be any conversion since the
sub authorities would be in little endin format when we did get_cifs_acl
prior to this copy.


> Shirish,
> Would you verify?
>
> --
> Thanks,
>
> Steve
>