From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andi Kleen Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] Btrfs updates Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2011 18:02:54 -0700 Message-ID: References: <1307879298-sup-3080@shiny> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: "Linus Torvalds" , "linux-btrfs" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org To: Chris Mason Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1307879298-sup-3080@shiny> (Chris Mason's message of "Sun, 12 Jun 2011 07:57:34 -0400") List-ID: Chris Mason writes: > Hi everyone, > > The for-linus branch of the btrfs unstable tree: > > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mason/btrfs-unstable.gi= t for-linus > > Has our current queue of fixes. Josef's is the biggest pile, mostly = in > the allocator. Josef and I both managed to merge his patch to avoid > mapping the extent buffer if skip_locking was set, git merge is just = a > little too easy sometimes (I double checked the resulting code). The new in 3.0 btrfs warnings on every build are still there: fs/btrfs/sysfs.c:76: warning: =E2=80=98btrfs_root_attrs=E2=80=99 define= d but not used fs/btrfs/sysfs.c:97: warning: =E2=80=98btrfs_super_attrs=E2=80=99 defin= ed but not used fs/btrfs/sysfs.c:153: warning: =E2=80=98btrfs_super_release=E2=80=99 de= fined but not used =20 fs/btrfs/sysfs.c:160: warning: =E2=80=98btrfs_root_release=E2=80=99 def= ined but not used These are not even used inside any ifdef. It's unclear to me: were these supposed to be used or removed? Probably better to remove since they seem to be untested, unless it was a merge error? -Andi --=20 ak@linux.intel.com -- Speaking for myself only