From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: mwilck@arcor.de Subject: [PATCH 2/8] DDF: __write_init_super_ddf: just use seq number of active header Date: Mon, 25 Mar 2013 23:11:07 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <1382695659-6231-3-git-send-email-mwilck@arcor.de> References: <1382695659-6231-1-git-send-email-mwilck@arcor.de> Return-path: Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2013 12:07:33 +0200 In-Reply-To: <1382695659-6231-1-git-send-email-mwilck@arcor.de> Sender: linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org To: neilb@suse.de, linux-raid@vger.kernel.org Cc: mwilck@arcor.de List-Id: linux-raid.ids It's not necessary to check for 0xffffffff, which is a valid sequential number. Signed-off-by: Martin Wilck --- super-ddf.c | 7 +------ 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) diff --git a/super-ddf.c b/super-ddf.c index 32dd023..85af345 100644 --- a/super-ddf.c +++ b/super-ddf.c @@ -2483,12 +2483,7 @@ static int __write_init_super_ddf(struct supertype *st) } memset(null_aligned, 0xff, NULL_CONF_SZ); - if (ddf->primary.seq != 0xffffffff) - seq = __cpu_to_be32(__be32_to_cpu(ddf->primary.seq)+1); - else if (ddf->secondary.seq != 0xffffffff) - seq = __cpu_to_be32(__be32_to_cpu(ddf->secondary.seq)+1); - else - seq = __cpu_to_be32(1); + seq = ddf->active->seq + 1; /* try to write updated metadata, * if we catch a failure move on to the next disk -- 1.7.1