* Re: [PATCH mdadm] raid6check.c: fix "misleading-indentation" error
2016-10-25 12:00 ` Jes Sorensen
@ 2016-10-25 13:21 ` Yilong Ren
2016-10-25 19:50 ` NeilBrown
1 sibling, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Yilong Ren @ 2016-10-25 13:21 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jes Sorensen; +Cc: LKP, NeilBrown, linux-raid
On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 08:00:01AM -0400, Jes Sorensen wrote:
> renyl <yilongx.ren@intel.com> writes:
> > From: Yilong Ren <yilongx.ren@intel.com>
> >
> > To fix the following error info:
> >
> > root@vm-lkp-nex04-8G-7 /tmp/mdadm# make test
> > cc -Wall -Werror -Wstrict-prototypes -Wextra -Wno-unused-parameter -ggdb -DSendmail=\""/usr/sbin/sendmail -t"\" -DCONFFILE=\"/etc/mdadm.conf\" -DCONFFILE2=\"/etc/mdadm/mdadm.conf\" -DMAP_DIR=\"/run/mdadm\" -DMAP_FILE=\"map\" -DMDMON_DIR=\"/run/mdadm\" -DFAILED_SLOTS_DIR=\"/run/mdadm/failed-slots\" -DNO_COROSYNC -DNO_DLM -DVERSION=\"3.4-43-g1dcee1c\" -DVERS_DATE="\"06th April 2016\"" -DUSE_PTHREADS -DBINDIR=\"/sbin\" -c -o raid6check.o raid6check.c
> > raid6check.c: In function 'manual_repair':
> > raid6check.c:267:4: error: this 'else' clause does not guard... [-Werror=misleading-indentation]
> > else
> > ^~~~
> > raid6check.c:269:5: note: ...this statement, but the latter is misleadingly indented as if it is guarded by the 'else'
> > printf("Repairing D(%d) and P\n", failed_data);
> > ^~~~~~
> > cc1: all warnings being treated as errors
> > <builtin>: recipe for target 'raid6check.o' failed
> > make: *** [raid6check.o] Error 1
> > root@vm-lkp-nex04-8G-7 /tmp/mdadm#
> >
> >
> > Cc: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.com>
> > Cc: linux-raid <linux-raid@vger.kernel.org>
> > Cc: LKP <lkp@eclists.intel.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Yilong Ren <yilongx.ren@intel.com>
> > ---
> > raid6check.c | 3 ++-
> > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/raid6check.c b/raid6check.c
> > index ad7ffe7..acfc9a3 100644
> > --- a/raid6check.c
> > +++ b/raid6check.c
> > @@ -264,9 +264,10 @@ int manual_repair(int chunk_size, int syndrome_disks,
> > int failed_data;
> > if (failed_slot1 == -1)
> > failed_data = failed_slot2;
> > - else
> > + else {
> > failed_data = failed_slot1;
> > printf("Repairing D(%d) and P\n", failed_data);
> > + }
> > raid6_datap_recov(syndrome_disks+2, chunk_size,
> > failed_data, (uint8_t**)blocks, 1);
> > } else {
>
> Hi,
>
> I suspect this patch is wrong and the code is meant to print in either
> case.
Oops, should like below:
diff --git a/raid6check.c b/raid6check.c
index ad7ffe7..551f835 100644
--- a/raid6check.c
+++ b/raid6check.c
@@ -266,7 +266,8 @@ int manual_repair(int chunk_size, int syndrome_disks,
failed_data = failed_slot2;
else
failed_data = failed_slot1;
- printf("Repairing D(%d) and P\n", failed_data);
+
+ printf("Repairing D(%d) and P\n", failed_data);
raid6_datap_recov(syndrome_disks+2, chunk_size,
failed_data, (uint8_t**)blocks, 1);
} else {
--
will send v2 after Neil confirm this point, thanks.
>
> Neil?
>
> Cheers,
> Jes
--
Thanks
Ren Yilong
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH mdadm] raid6check.c: fix "misleading-indentation" error
2016-10-25 12:00 ` Jes Sorensen
2016-10-25 13:21 ` Yilong Ren
@ 2016-10-25 19:50 ` NeilBrown
1 sibling, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: NeilBrown @ 2016-10-25 19:50 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jes Sorensen, renyl; +Cc: LKP, linux-raid
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2517 bytes --]
On Tue, Oct 25 2016, Jes Sorensen wrote:
> renyl <yilongx.ren@intel.com> writes:
>> From: Yilong Ren <yilongx.ren@intel.com>
>>
>> To fix the following error info:
>>
>> root@vm-lkp-nex04-8G-7 /tmp/mdadm# make test
>> cc -Wall -Werror -Wstrict-prototypes -Wextra -Wno-unused-parameter -ggdb -DSendmail=\""/usr/sbin/sendmail -t"\" -DCONFFILE=\"/etc/mdadm.conf\" -DCONFFILE2=\"/etc/mdadm/mdadm.conf\" -DMAP_DIR=\"/run/mdadm\" -DMAP_FILE=\"map\" -DMDMON_DIR=\"/run/mdadm\" -DFAILED_SLOTS_DIR=\"/run/mdadm/failed-slots\" -DNO_COROSYNC -DNO_DLM -DVERSION=\"3.4-43-g1dcee1c\" -DVERS_DATE="\"06th April 2016\"" -DUSE_PTHREADS -DBINDIR=\"/sbin\" -c -o raid6check.o raid6check.c
>> raid6check.c: In function 'manual_repair':
>> raid6check.c:267:4: error: this 'else' clause does not guard... [-Werror=misleading-indentation]
>> else
>> ^~~~
>> raid6check.c:269:5: note: ...this statement, but the latter is misleadingly indented as if it is guarded by the 'else'
>> printf("Repairing D(%d) and P\n", failed_data);
>> ^~~~~~
>> cc1: all warnings being treated as errors
>> <builtin>: recipe for target 'raid6check.o' failed
>> make: *** [raid6check.o] Error 1
>> root@vm-lkp-nex04-8G-7 /tmp/mdadm#
>>
>>
>> Cc: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.com>
>> Cc: linux-raid <linux-raid@vger.kernel.org>
>> Cc: LKP <lkp@eclists.intel.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Yilong Ren <yilongx.ren@intel.com>
>> ---
>> raid6check.c | 3 ++-
>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/raid6check.c b/raid6check.c
>> index ad7ffe7..acfc9a3 100644
>> --- a/raid6check.c
>> +++ b/raid6check.c
>> @@ -264,9 +264,10 @@ int manual_repair(int chunk_size, int syndrome_disks,
>> int failed_data;
>> if (failed_slot1 == -1)
>> failed_data = failed_slot2;
>> - else
>> + else {
>> failed_data = failed_slot1;
>> printf("Repairing D(%d) and P\n", failed_data);
>> + }
>> raid6_datap_recov(syndrome_disks+2, chunk_size,
>> failed_data, (uint8_t**)blocks, 1);
>> } else {
>
> Hi,
>
> I suspect this patch is wrong and the code is meant to print in either
> case.
>
> Neil?
Looking at the whole
if (failed_slot1 == -2 || failed_slot2 == -2) {
statement it looks like every path through should print a message, and
this section would be more similar to the previous section if, as you
say, the code prints in either case.
So I agree: original code is correct, indentation is wrong.
NeilBrown
>
> Cheers,
> Jes
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 800 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread