From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from relay.sgi.com (relay3.corp.sgi.com [198.149.34.15]) by oss.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1D22F7F51 for ; Fri, 1 Aug 2014 22:20:11 -0500 (CDT) Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda2.sgi.com [192.48.176.25]) by relay3.corp.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9F506AC00A for ; Fri, 1 Aug 2014 20:20:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ipmail06.adl6.internode.on.net (ipmail06.adl6.internode.on.net [150.101.137.145]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id OtHlioWmDBjdomSk for ; Fri, 01 Aug 2014 20:20:08 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 2 Aug 2014 13:20:06 +1000 From: Dave Chinner Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] xfs: dquot recovery needs verifiers Message-ID: <20140802032006.GT20518@dastard> References: <1406768509-32556-1-git-send-email-david@fromorbit.com> <1406768509-32556-5-git-send-email-david@fromorbit.com> <20140801143023.GD26455@infradead.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20140801143023.GD26455@infradead.org> 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: Christoph Hellwig Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com On Fri, Aug 01, 2014 at 07:30:23AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 11:01:49AM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote: > > From: Dave Chinner > > > > dquot recovery should add verifiers to the dquot buffers that it > > recovers changes into. Unfortunately, it doesn't attached the > > verifiers to the buffers in a consistent manner. For example, > > xlog_recover_dquot_pass2() reads dquot buffers without a verifier > > and then writes it without ever having attached a verifier to the > > buffer. > > > > Further, dquot buffer recovery may write a dquot buffer that has not > > been modified, or indeed, shoul dbe written because quotas are not > > enabled and hence changes to the buffer were not replayed. In this > > case, we again write buffers without verifiers attached because that > > doesn't happen until after the buffer changes have been replayed. > > > > Signed-off-by: Dave Chinner > > The xlog_recover_do_reg_buffer look fine to me, but what's the rationale > for removing the xfs_dqcheck call? It's done by the verifier. Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@fromorbit.com _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs