From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from relay.sgi.com (relay1.corp.sgi.com [137.38.102.111]) by oss.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2A99B7F3F for ; Tue, 22 Apr 2014 01:47:39 -0500 (CDT) Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda3.sgi.com [192.48.176.15]) by relay1.corp.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 16B128F8049 for ; Mon, 21 Apr 2014 23:47:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([198.137.202.9]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id c9tRJ0ohGpazfoZZ (version=TLSv1 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Mon, 21 Apr 2014 23:47:37 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 21 Apr 2014 23:47:37 -0700 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/9] repair: detect CRC errors in AG headers Message-ID: <20140422064737.GA32026@infradead.org> References: <1397550301-31883-1-git-send-email-david@fromorbit.com> <1397550301-31883-6-git-send-email-david@fromorbit.com> <20140421071106.GF20384@infradead.org> <20140421233512.GE18672@dastard> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20140421233512.GE18672@dastard> List-Id: XFS Filesystem from SGI List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: Dave Chinner Cc: Christoph Hellwig , xfs@oss.sgi.com On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 09:35:12AM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote: > > Shouldn't we apply the same scheme as for directories here, that is if > > it fails with a verifier error re-read without the verifier and then > > still do the full check as well? > > The directory code is the special case - it uses xfs_trans_read_buf* > interfaces, which return either a good buffer with no error or an > error with no buffer. Hence for the directory code, we have to > re-read the buffer without the verifier to grab the unchecked buffer > from the cache when the verifier detects an error. How about just having a variant of xfs_da_read_buf that doesn't use xfs_trans_read_buf *? xfs_da_read_buf is pretty simple, especially when removing the magic test that has been superceeded by the verifiers. _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs