Comment # 4 on bug 1037309 from
Hi!

(In reply to Tom���� Chv��tal from comment #3)
> Hmm, it seems upstream is a bit funny there.

I will check the commits between the version 168 and 170.

> 
> You can compile separate lockd as we do but it won't be loaded.

You mean splitting lockd out from lvm2-clvm? Sorry, but what do you mean by "it
won't be loaded"?

> 
> If you check the .h file it states for the LVMLOCKD_SUPPORT undefined to
> inline those functions (see 'static inline') on the declarations.

Yes, macro LVMLOCKD_SUPPORT should be "1" so that the real code can be compiled
in.

> 
> Unless I am mistaken this means for the compiler to actually put the code in
> the binary rather than issue follow up call for the function later on.

Yes, the problem is, i think, why LVMLOCKD_SUPPORT is not "1"? I'm not familiar
with make-auto tools, but I will dig more.


You are receiving this mail because: