| To: | Mark Tinguely <tinguely@xxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [3.0-stable PATCH 04/36] xfs: xfs_trans_add_item() - dont assign in ASSERT() when compare is intended |
| From: | Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Wed, 12 Dec 2012 10:33:05 +1100 |
| Cc: | stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <20121203144309.165103824@xxxxxxx> |
| References: | <20121203144208.143464631@xxxxxxx> <20121203144309.165103824@xxxxxxx> |
| User-agent: | Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) |
On Mon, Dec 03, 2012 at 05:42:12PM -0600, Mark Tinguely wrote: > From: Jesper Juhl <jj@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Upstream commit: f65020a83ad570c1788f7d8ece67f3487166576b > > 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 latter to the former. > > Signed-off-by: Jesper Juhl <jj@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Signed-off-by: Ben Myers <bpm@xxxxxxx> > > (cherry picked from commit 05293485a0b6b1f803e8a3c0ff188c38f6969985) Only affects debug builds, and isn't a bug that would cause any problems at all, so it is really necessary? Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx |
| Previous by Date: | Bug#695640: xfs_quota: cannot find mount point for path: Success, Brian May |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: [3.0-stable PATCH 05/36] xfs: only take the ILOCK in xfs_reclaim_inode(), Dave Chinner |
| Previous by Thread: | [3.0-stable PATCH 04/36] xfs: xfs_trans_add_item() - dont assign in ASSERT() when compare is intended, Mark Tinguely |
| Next by Thread: | [3.0-stable PATCH 07/36] xfs: fallback to vmalloc for large buffers in xfs_getbmap, Mark Tinguely |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |