On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 08:11:59AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 01:13:33AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > So what do you think of the version that adds real printks for > > each condition including more details like the one verifier I > > did below? Probably needs some unlikely annotations, though. > > Given that there was another resend of the series I'd be really > curious about the answer to this? Oh! Sorry, I lost the thread and forgot to reply. :( For debug kernels, I think it's definitely valuable to us to enhance the corruption reports by printing out the expected value(s) and the observed value so that we can pinpoint quickly exactly which test failed and why. I'm not as strongly convinced that it's worth it to put all those strings into release builds and have to carry those around in memory. Then again, on my rc7 dev build the strings only contribute about 120K to a 1.4MB .ko file so it might not be a big deal. I also think it would be useful for xfs_verifier_error to print more of the corrupted buffer. --D > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-xfs" in > the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-xfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
