Re: [PATCH 1/2] xfs: rename the old_crc variable in xlog_recover_process

["Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@kernel.org>]

On Mon, Sep 15, 2025 at 06:20:29AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> old_crc is a very misleading name.  Rename it to expected_crc as that
> described the usage much better.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>

Pretty straightforward so
Reviewed-by: "Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@kernel.org>

--D

> ---
>  fs/xfs/xfs_log_recover.c | 17 ++++++++---------
>  1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_log_recover.c b/fs/xfs/xfs_log_recover.c
> index e6ed9e09c027..0a4db8efd903 100644
> --- a/fs/xfs/xfs_log_recover.c
> +++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_log_recover.c
> @@ -2894,20 +2894,19 @@ xlog_recover_process(
>  	int			pass,
>  	struct list_head	*buffer_list)
>  {
> -	__le32			old_crc = rhead->h_crc;
> -	__le32			crc;
> +	__le32			expected_crc = rhead->h_crc, crc;
>  
>  	crc = xlog_cksum(log, rhead, dp, be32_to_cpu(rhead->h_len));
>  
>  	/*
>  	 * Nothing else to do if this is a CRC verification pass. Just return
>  	 * if this a record with a non-zero crc. Unfortunately, mkfs always
> -	 * sets old_crc to 0 so we must consider this valid even on v5 supers.
> -	 * Otherwise, return EFSBADCRC on failure so the callers up the stack
> -	 * know precisely what failed.
> +	 * sets expected_crc to 0 so we must consider this valid even on v5
> +	 * supers.  Otherwise, return EFSBADCRC on failure so the callers up the
> +	 * stack know precisely what failed.
>  	 */
>  	if (pass == XLOG_RECOVER_CRCPASS) {
> -		if (old_crc && crc != old_crc)
> +		if (expected_crc && crc != expected_crc)
>  			return -EFSBADCRC;
>  		return 0;
>  	}
> @@ -2918,11 +2917,11 @@ xlog_recover_process(
>  	 * zero CRC check prevents warnings from being emitted when upgrading
>  	 * the kernel from one that does not add CRCs by default.
>  	 */
> -	if (crc != old_crc) {
> -		if (old_crc || xfs_has_crc(log->l_mp)) {
> +	if (crc != expected_crc) {
> +		if (expected_crc || xfs_has_crc(log->l_mp)) {
>  			xfs_alert(log->l_mp,
>  		"log record CRC mismatch: found 0x%x, expected 0x%x.",
> -					le32_to_cpu(old_crc),
> +					le32_to_cpu(expected_crc),
>  					le32_to_cpu(crc));
>  			xfs_hex_dump(dp, 32);
>  		}
> -- 
> 2.47.2
> 
>