Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 24 Jul 2008 08:43:11 -0500 | From | "Shirish Pargaonkar" <> | Subject | Re: cifs: suggestions for a few more sparse warnings |
| |
Steve,
On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 8:39 PM, Steve French <smfrench@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 7:55 PM, Harvey Harrison > <harvey.harrison@gmail.com> wrote: >> Here's a patch for some of the other warnings, but the cifsacl.c bit >> needs a comment I think. >> >> Harvey >> >> diff --git a/fs/cifs/cifsacl.c b/fs/cifs/cifsacl.c >> index 34902cf..70f0ef5 100644 >> --- a/fs/cifs/cifsacl.c >> +++ b/fs/cifs/cifsacl.c >> @@ -169,8 +169,7 @@ static void copy_sec_desc(const struct cifs_ntsd *pntsd, >> for (i = 0; i < 6; i++) >> ngroup_sid_ptr->authority[i] = group_sid_ptr->authority[i]; >> for (i = 0; i < 5; i++) >> - ngroup_sid_ptr->sub_auth[i] = >> - cpu_to_le32(group_sid_ptr->sub_auth[i]); >> + cpu_to_le32s(&group_sid_ptr->sub_auth[i]); >> >> return; >> } > > No - the cifsacl one looks like just a bug - there should not be an > endian conversion here. >
I think you are right, there should not be any conversion since the sub authorities would be in little endin format when we did get_cifs_acl prior to this copy.
> Shirish, > Would you verify? > > -- > Thanks, > > Steve >
| |