xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH 4/7] xfs: add xfs_btree_check_lptr_disk

To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/7] xfs: add xfs_btree_check_lptr_disk
From: Nathan Scott <nathans@xxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 14 Jul 2006 17:06:29 +1000
Cc: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20060712154317.GA21752@xxxxxx>; from hch@xxxxxx on Wed, Jul 12, 2006 at 05:43:17PM +0200
References: <20060710170420.GD26786@xxxxxx> <20060712104921.A1732817@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20060712154317.GA21752@xxxxxx>
Sender: xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mutt/1.2.5i
Hi Christoph,

On Wed, Jul 12, 2006 at 05:43:17PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 12, 2006 at 10:49:21AM +1000, Nathan Scott wrote:
> > 
> > > -                 if ((error = xfs_btree_check_lptr(cur, INT_GET(pp[i], 
> > > ARCH_CONVERT), level))) {
> > > +                 if ((error = xfs_btree_check_lptr_disk(cur, pp, 
> > > level))) {
> > 
> > This incorrectly changes the debug-only btree checking here, no?
> 
> Right, it should be pp[i], I'll resping the patch.  I wonder why I

Don't worry about it - I've got it fixed here.  I'm outta time
for today, will merge it Monday - this and the rest look good.

> > INT_GET?  Maybe static inline here for type checking?  *shrug*.

Send an incremental on the rest of the previous series if you
think this is better, and I'll merge it Monday too.

BTW, the xfs_bulkstat annotations overlapped with a bunch of tuning
work I'd done in there (probably merge that next week too), and I'd
noticed that the endian swizzling in there is all pointless - it's
only an incore buffer of inode clusters... I've got this fixed in a
patch that applies after your series (so I'll apply the sparse work
there, but in the end it'll come back out - no matter).

cheers.

-- 
Nathan


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>