[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH 1/1] XFS: xfs_iformat realtime device target pointer check

To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] XFS: xfs_iformat realtime device target pointer check
From: Ramon de Carvalho Valle <ramon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 05 Aug 2009 13:34:02 -0300
Cc: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx>, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, mszeredi@xxxxxxxxxx, hch@xxxxxx, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20090805151750.GA16080@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <1249329808.7686.26.camel@logos> <20090803214929.GB3167@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1249351241.7513.18.camel@logos> <4A786110.8090404@xxxxxxxxxxx> <1249411898.7576.19.camel@logos> <20090805151750.GA16080@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
On Wed, 2009-08-05 at 11:17 -0400, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 04, 2009 at 03:51:38PM -0300, Ramon de Carvalho Valle wrote:
> > The xfs_iformat function does not check if the realtime device target 
> > pointer
> > is valid when the XFS_DIFLAG_REALTIME flag is set on the ondisk inode
> > structure.
> Same as Eric I don't think there's much of a point renumbering the error
> cases.  Instead I'll do another patch with a couple of cleanups in this
> function replacing all the numbers with short alphabetic tags.

Great. Thanks.

> I don't really see the point of printing the flags either, if we have
> this bit flipped it's pretty clear that we had random corruption of this
> dinode.

Printing the flags is just for debugging purposes and it keeps the code
consistent with the other calls to xfs_fs_repair_cmn_err.


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

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