From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.3 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 962A0C3524A for ; Tue, 4 Feb 2020 06:15:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7250520674 for ; Tue, 4 Feb 2020 06:15:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726230AbgBDGPs (ORCPT ); Tue, 4 Feb 2020 01:15:48 -0500 Received: from verein.lst.de ([213.95.11.211]:59432 "EHLO verein.lst.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725834AbgBDGPs (ORCPT ); Tue, 4 Feb 2020 01:15:48 -0500 Received: by verein.lst.de (Postfix, from userid 2407) id 9ABBD68BFE; Tue, 4 Feb 2020 07:15:46 +0100 (CET) Date: Tue, 4 Feb 2020 07:15:46 +0100 From: Christoph Hellwig To: Eric Sandeen Cc: Christoph Hellwig , linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org, Eric Sandeen Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/6] xfs: remove XFS_BUF_TO_SBP Message-ID: <20200204061546.GA31878@lst.de> References: <20200130133343.225818-1-hch@lst.de> <20200130133343.225818-7-hch@lst.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01) Sender: linux-xfs-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Feb 03, 2020 at 12:38:34PM -0600, Eric Sandeen wrote: > > @@ -707,7 +707,7 @@ xfs_sb_read_verify( > > * Check all the superblock fields. Don't byteswap the xquota flags > > * because _verify_common checks the on-disk values. > > */ > > - __xfs_sb_from_disk(&sb, XFS_BUF_TO_SBP(bp), false); > > + __xfs_sb_from_disk(&sb, bp->b_addr, false); > > why not dsb here Yes, this should just pass dsb. > In any case seems like if you already have a local xfs_dsb, use that vs. > bp->b_addr? That was the planned, but I obviously missed one spot.