From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:54916) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1alh86-0006SU-8o for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 31 Mar 2016 14:15:39 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1alh82-0004Kc-W1 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 31 Mar 2016 14:15:38 -0400 Received: from mail.avalus.com ([89.16.176.221]:57228) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1alh82-0004Jr-LX for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 31 Mar 2016 14:15:34 -0400 From: Alex Bligh Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2016 19:15:32 +0100 Message-Id: <1459448132-52364-1-git-send-email-alex@alex.org.uk> Subject: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 2/2] Correct definition of NBD_CMD_FLAG_FUA List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Eric Blake , Wouter Verhelst Cc: "nbd-general@lists.sourceforge.net" , "qemu-devel@nongnu.org" , Alex Bligh NBD_CMD_FLAG_FUA is defined as 1<<0 in the documentation, but 1<<16 in nbd.h. It is not used anywhere within the code. 1<<16 cannot work as the flags word is only 16 bits long. It is doubtful whether anyone is using NBD_CMD_FLAG_FUA at the moment in any case. Signed-off-by: Alex Bligh --- nbd.h | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/nbd.h b/nbd.h index f2a32dd..53b6ca1 100644 --- a/nbd.h +++ b/nbd.h @@ -38,7 +38,7 @@ enum { }; #define NBD_CMD_MASK_COMMAND 0x0000ffff -#define NBD_CMD_FLAG_FUA (1<<16) +#define NBD_CMD_FLAG_FUA (1 << 0) /* values for flags field */ #define NBD_FLAG_HAS_FLAGS (1 << 0) /* Flags are there */ -- 1.9.1