On Tue, Sep 06, 2022 at 06:34:40AM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote: >> I thought about that. And I suspect it probably is the right thing >> to do. I'm mostly stayed away from it because it doesn't really >> help with the goal in this series, and I also don't have good >> code coverage to fail comfortable touching the metadata checksum >> handling and repair. I can offer this sneaky deal: if someone >> help creating good metadata repair coverage in xfstests, I will look >> into this next. > > Then may I take this work since it's mostly independent and you can > continue your existing work without being distracted? Fine with me as well.
