On 2/8/16 5:33 PM, Dave Chinner wrote:
> From: Dave Chinner <dchinner@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
> As it uses buffer verifiers that only exist when CONFIG_XFS_RT=y.
>
> Signed-off-by: Dave Chinner <dchinner@xxxxxxxxxx>
Reviewed-by: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> Note: I will fold this back into the original patch that caused
> this build regression and rebuild the for-next tree.
>
> fs/xfs/xfs_log_recover.c | 2 ++
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_log_recover.c b/fs/xfs/xfs_log_recover.c
> index 23ad143..1dc0e14 100644
> --- a/fs/xfs/xfs_log_recover.c
> +++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_log_recover.c
> @@ -2472,11 +2472,13 @@ xlog_recover_validate_buf_type(
> }
> bp->b_ops = &xfs_sb_buf_ops;
> break;
> +#ifdef CONFIG_XFS_RT
> case XFS_BLFT_RTBITMAP_BUF:
> case XFS_BLFT_RTSUMMARY_BUF:
> /* no magic numbers for verification of RT buffers */
> bp->b_ops = &xfs_rtbuf_ops;
> break;
> +#endif /* CONFIG_XFS_RT */
> default:
> xfs_warn(mp, "Unknown buffer type %d!",
> xfs_blft_from_flags(buf_f));
>
> _______________________________________________
> xfs mailing list
> xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
> http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
>
|