Gentoo Websites Logo
Go to: Gentoo Home Documentation Forums Lists Bugs Planet Store Wiki Get Gentoo!
Bug 657446 - sys-fs/lvm2-2.02.166 - device/dev-io.c:508:5: error: label ‘opened’ used but not defined
Summary: sys-fs/lvm2-2.02.166 - device/dev-io.c:508:5: error: label ‘opened’ used but ...
Status: RESOLVED DUPLICATE of bug 616198
Alias: None
Product: Gentoo Linux
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Current packages (show other bugs)
Hardware: HPPA Linux
: Normal normal (vote)
Assignee: Robin Johnson
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords: PATCH
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2018-06-06 05:21 UTC by Jeroen Roovers (RETIRED)
Modified: 2019-06-12 07:44 UTC (History)
3 users (show)

See Also:
Package list:
Runtime testing required: ---


Attachments
lvm-2.02.166-HPPA-no-O_DIRECT.patch (lvm-2.02.166-HPPA-no-O_DIRECT.patch,285 bytes, patch)
2018-06-06 05:21 UTC, Jeroen Roovers (RETIRED)
Details | Diff

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Jeroen Roovers (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2018-06-06 05:21:53 UTC
Created attachment 535018 [details, diff]
lvm-2.02.166-HPPA-no-O_DIRECT.patch

Bug #99532 apparently introduced this change in ebuilds:

    # disable O_DIRECT support on hppa, breaks pv detection (#99532)
    use hppa && myconf="${myconf} --disable-o_direct"


lib/device/dev-io.c now defines the `opened` label only when O_DIRECT_SUPPORT.

#ifdef O_DIRECT_SUPPORT
      opened:
        if (direct)
                dev->flags |= DEV_O_DIRECT_TESTED;
#endif

which apparently should only be gone to when O_DIRECT_SUPPORT, but commit [1] introduces another `goto opened` without that guard.

I think we can fix this by guarding the `goto opened` with another #ifdef O_DIRECT_SUPPORT as in the attached patch.


https://sourceware.org/git/?p=lvm2.git;a=commitdiff;h=b5314c2a6ae5fe4f802e82a4f31cf2fad398ded9;hp=f3d508630d7acdd638afae700973f1d68e43cbcc
Comment 1 Austin English 2019-06-12 00:25:38 UTC
Dupe of bug 616198?
Comment 2 Jeroen Roovers (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2019-06-12 07:44:50 UTC
(In reply to Austin English from comment #1)
> Dupe of bug 616198?

Apparently.

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 616198 ***