[PATCH 3/3] compilation fixes for gcc 4.0

[Grzegorz Piotr Jaskiewicz]

This one causes most doubts in me, as it is a function declared inside 
body of another function.

Is there really a need to have such mad code in reiser4 fs ??
This issue was raised already on reiser4 mailing list.
Here it's only for reviev and opinions, if no doubts, please apply.

Signed-off-by: Grzegorz Jaskiewicz <gj at pointblue.com.pl>

--- fs/reiser4/search.c    2004-09-22 20:38:04 +0200
+++ fs/reiser4/search.new.c        2004-09-22 20:37:26 +0200
@@ -1088,6 +1088,20 @@
}
#endif

+/* true if @key is left delimiting key of @node */
+static int key_is_ld(znode * node, const reiser4_key * key) {
+       int ld;
+
+        assert("nikita-1716", node != NULL);
+        assert("nikita-1758", key != NULL);
+
+        RLOCK_DK(znode_get_tree(node));
+        assert("nikita-1759", znode_contains_key(node, key));
+        ld = keyeq(znode_get_ld_key(node), key);
+        RUNLOCK_DK(znode_get_tree(node));
+        return ld;
+}
+
/* Process one node during tree traversal.

   This is called by cbk_level_lookup(). */
@@ -1107,19 +1121,6 @@
       /* result */
       int result;

-       /* true if @key is left delimiting key of @node */
-       static int key_is_ld(znode * node, const reiser4_key * key) {
-               int ld;
-
-                assert("nikita-1716", node != NULL);
-                assert("nikita-1758", key != NULL);
-
-                RLOCK_DK(znode_get_tree(node));
-                assert("nikita-1759", znode_contains_key(node, key));
-                ld = keyeq(znode_get_ld_key(node), key);
-                RUNLOCK_DK(znode_get_tree(node));
-                return ld;
-       }
       assert("nikita-379", h != NULL);

       active = h->active_lh->node;


--
GJ
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/