xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH 4/4 V2] xfsprogs: zero out clean log in xfs_metadump

To: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4 V2] xfsprogs: zero out clean log in xfs_metadump
From: Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2015 09:35:43 +1000
Cc: Brian Foster <bfoster@xxxxxxxxxx>, Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxx>, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
Delivered-to: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <5575DFB1.4010004@xxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <5568B7CE.9030709@xxxxxxxxxx> <5568BB5C.4080400@xxxxxxxxxxx> <5575AF7A.8050306@xxxxxxxxxxx> <20150608182947.GA18211@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <5575DFB1.4010004@xxxxxxxxxxx>
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
On Mon, Jun 08, 2015 at 01:32:17PM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote:
> On 6/8/15 1:29 PM, Brian Foster wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 08, 2015 at 10:06:34AM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote:
> >> When doing an obfuscated xfs_metadump, if the log is clean, zero
> >> it out for 2 reasons:
> >>
> >>  * It'll make the image more compressible
> >>  * It'll eliminate an un-obfuscated metadata source
> >>
> >> If the log isn't clean, and the user expected obfuscation, warn
> >> that metadata in the log will not be obfuscated.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >> ---
> >>
> >> V2: If not obfuscating, copy log as-is
> >>
> > 
> > FYI, I think v1 of this was already pulled into the for-next branch.
> > Anyways...
> 
> Yeah, I noticed - I'll ask dave to fix it (that one rebases, right?) :)

Just send a delta patch against what I committed, that way I don't
need to rebase the tree.

Cheers,

Dave.
-- 
Dave Chinner
david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx

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