Re: review: fix bulkstat error detection logic

[Nathan Scott <nathans@xxxxxxx>]

On Fri, Jul 28, 2006 at 03:40:35PM +1000, Timothy Shimmin wrote:
> Looks reasonable.
> So you still do the inode buffer validation but we don't print out
> a corruption error msg and we return EINVAL instead of EFSCORRUPTED.

Right.

> Can we not be bulkstat'ing over inodes with reasonable numbers/locations but
> the inode data on disk is just corrupted?

Yes, we can, but we don't want bulkstat to shutdown the filesystem
in that situation.

cheers.

-- 
Nathan