From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com>
Received: from relay.sgi.com (relay3.corp.sgi.com [198.149.34.15])
	by oss.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B1B47F58
	for <xfs@oss.sgi.com>; Tue,  9 Jul 2013 13:22:11 -0500 (CDT)
Date: Tue, 9 Jul 2013 13:22:07 -0500
From: Ben Myers <bpm@sgi.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] xfs: check on-disk (not incore) btree root size in dfrag.c
Message-ID: <20130709182206.GS20932@sgi.com>
References: <4F7225BA.40200@redhat.com> <51C227ED.5010108@sandeen.net>
	<20130620170929.GY20932@sgi.com> <51DC39AC.4090003@sandeen.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <51DC39AC.4090003@sandeen.net>
List-Id: XFS Filesystem from SGI <xfs.oss.sgi.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/options/xfs>,
	<mailto:xfs-request@oss.sgi.com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://oss.sgi.com/pipermail/xfs>
List-Post: <mailto:xfs@oss.sgi.com>
List-Help: <mailto:xfs-request@oss.sgi.com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs>,
	<mailto:xfs-request@oss.sgi.com?subject=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: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@sandeen.net>
Cc: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@redhat.com>, xfs-oss <xfs@oss.sgi.com>

On Tue, Jul 09, 2013 at 11:26:20AM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote:
> On 6/20/13 12:09 PM, Ben Myers wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 04:51:41PM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote:
> >> On 3/27/12 3:40 PM, Eric Sandeen wrote:
> >>> xfs_swap_extents_check_format() contains checks to make sure that
> >>> original and the temporary files during defrag are compatible;
> >>> Gabriel VLASIU ran into a case where xfs_fsr returned EINVAL
> >>> because the tests found the btree root to be of size 120,
> >>> while the fork offset was only 104; IOW, they overlapped.
> >>>
> >>> However, this is just due to an error in the
> >>> xfs_swap_extents_check_format() tests, because it is checking
> >>> the in-memory btree root size against the on-disk fork offset.
> >>> We should be checking the on-disk sizes in both cases.
> >>>
> >>> This patch adds a new macro to calculate this size, and uses
> >>> it in the tests.
> >>>
> >>> With this change, the filesystem image provided by Gabriel
> >>> allows for proper file degragmentation.
> >>
> >> I think this and the followup patch 2/1 got lost.
> >>
> >> Ben, any idea?
> > 
> > Yeah.  Sorry Eric.
> 
> I see the first patch is now merged.  Can you please also merge the
> 2nd patch?  It is also reviewed already.

Patch still looks good in light of the crc work.  Applied.

Reviewed-by: Ben Myers <bpm@sgi.com>

_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs