Re: [PATCh v2 1/9] btrfs: Move btrfs_check_chunk_valid() to tree-check.[ch] and export it

[David Sterba <dsterba@suse.cz>]

On Tue, Mar 26, 2019 at 07:02:20AM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote:
> On 2019/3/26 上午1:06, David Sterba wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 02:37:09PM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote:
> >> By function, chunk item verification is more suitable to be done inside
> >> tree-checker.
> >>
> >> So move btrfs_check_chunk_valid() to tree-checker.c and export it.
> >>
> >> And since it's now moved to tree-checker, also add a better comment for
> >> what this function is doing.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo <wqu@suse.com>
> >> ---
> >>  fs/btrfs/tree-checker.c | 99 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >>  fs/btrfs/tree-checker.h |  3 ++
> >>  fs/btrfs/volumes.c      | 94 +-------------------------------------
> >>  3 files changed, 103 insertions(+), 93 deletions(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/fs/btrfs/tree-checker.c b/fs/btrfs/tree-checker.c
> >> index b8cdaf472031..4e44323ae758 100644
> >> --- a/fs/btrfs/tree-checker.c
> >> +++ b/fs/btrfs/tree-checker.c
> >> @@ -448,6 +448,105 @@ static int check_block_group_item(struct btrfs_fs_info *fs_info,
> >>  	return 0;
> >>  }
> >>  
> >> +/*
> >> + * The common chunk check which could also work on super block sys chunk array.
> >> + *
> >> + * Return -EUCLEAN if anything is corrupted.
> > 
> > Well, that's still confusing if you say EUCLEAN in the commend and use
> > EIO in the code.
> > 
> Oh, that EIO to EUCLEAN change is in later patch (3/9).

Yes, but this patch when viewed on itself is confusing. The EIO->EUCLEAN
in the comment belongs to 3/9 too.

> Do I need to resend the patchset?

No, such small fixups I do myself but I need to point that out so we
reach a common understanding and what's expected.