On Mon, 13 Feb 2012, Jesper Juhl wrote:
> It looks to me like the two ASSERT()s in xfs_trans_add_item() really
> want to do a compare (==) rather than assignment (=).
> This patch changes it from the former to the latter.
Ehh, I mean from the latter to the former, of course.. :-/
> I must admit though, that I don't know this code well and have only
> compile tested this change. But if assignment is really intended it
> really seems strange to do it as part of an ASSERT...
> Signed-off-by: Jesper Juhl <jj@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> fs/xfs/xfs_trans.c | 4 ++--
> 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_trans.c b/fs/xfs/xfs_trans.c
> index 329b06a..7adcdf1 100644
> --- a/fs/xfs/xfs_trans.c
> +++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_trans.c
> @@ -1151,8 +1151,8 @@ xfs_trans_add_item(
> struct xfs_log_item_desc *lidp;
> - ASSERT(lip->li_mountp = tp->t_mountp);
> - ASSERT(lip->li_ailp = tp->t_mountp->m_ail);
> + ASSERT(lip->li_mountp == tp->t_mountp);
> + ASSERT(lip->li_ailp == tp->t_mountp->m_ail);
> lidp = kmem_zone_zalloc(xfs_log_item_desc_zone, KM_SLEEP | KM_NOFS);
Jesper Juhl <jj@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> http://www.chaosbits.net/
Don't top-post http://www.catb.org/jargon/html/T/top-post.html
Plain text mails only, please.