xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH 4/9] xfs: add CRC checks to the AGFL

To: Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/9] xfs: add CRC checks to the AGFL
From: Ben Myers <bpm@xxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2013 17:35:37 -0600
Cc: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
Delivered-to: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20130227233155.GF5551@dastard>
References: <1358774760-21841-1-git-send-email-david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1358774760-21841-5-git-send-email-david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20130227223750.GZ22182@xxxxxxx> <20130227232045.GE5551@dastard> <20130227233155.GF5551@dastard>
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14)
Dave,

On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 10:31:55AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 10:20:45AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 04:37:50PM -0600, Ben Myers wrote:
> > > Hi Dave,
> ....
> > > > +       case XFS_BLF_AGFL_BUF:
> > > > +               if (*(__be32 *)bp->b_addr != 
> > > > cpu_to_be32(XFS_AGFL_MAGIC)) {
> > > > +                       xfs_warn(mp, "Bad AGFL block magic!");
> > > > +                       ASSERT(0);
> > > > +               }
> > > > +               bp->b_ops = &xfs_agfl_buf_ops;
> > > > +               break;
> > > 
> > > Your changes for v2 in this section look good.
> > 
> > Actually, the above hunk is broken. The magic number should only be
> > checked for CRC enabled filesystems. My current code has this check,
> > though I thought I fixed that long before I reposted this series...
> 
> I just realised you're commenting on the original version of the
> patch series, no the new version I posted a couple of days ago. It
> is fixed in that version of the patch, so I'm not going totally
> crazy (yet!)....

Yep.  The new rev looks good.

> Can you switch over to the newer version of the patch set?

Will do.

-Ben

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