From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from relay.sgi.com (relay2.corp.sgi.com [137.38.102.29]) by oss.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F2797F6A for ; Thu, 13 Feb 2014 20:04:13 -0600 (CST) Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda2.sgi.com [192.48.176.25]) by relay2.corp.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0072A304039 for ; Thu, 13 Feb 2014 18:04:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from sandeen.net (sandeen.net [63.231.237.45]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id TaeNoVAtUJbxbuFl for ; Thu, 13 Feb 2014 18:04:08 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <52FD7997.1020407@sandeen.net> Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2014 20:04:07 -0600 From: Eric Sandeen MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH V3] xfs: skip verification on initial "guess" superblock read References: <52FD3C59.3050400@redhat.com> <52FD55FC.1000103@sandeen.net> <20140214002708.GO13997@dastard> In-Reply-To: <20140214002708.GO13997@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: Eric Sandeen , xfs-oss On 2/13/14, 6:27 PM, Dave Chinner wrote: > Looks fine. I'll run it through some testing and we can go from > there. FWIW, does this make your "check the sector size in the sb > verifier" patch redundant? Well, it'll be safe for the primary SB, but I assume that a corrupted secondary would still trip things up. I think that at this point we can switch to using BBTOB(bp->b_length) in the verifier and be safe. I'll look into it. -Eric > Cheers, > > Dave. > _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs