On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 09:08:11AM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote:
> On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 01:47:21PM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> > From: Darrick J. Wong <darrick.wong@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > Use the new helper to read secondary superblocks instead of opencoding
> > it ourselves.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Darrick J. Wong <darrick.wong@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > fs/xfs/xfs_fsops.c | 10 ++++------
> > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_fsops.c b/fs/xfs/xfs_fsops.c
> > index 056a76689197..40c131ebf772 100644
> > --- a/fs/xfs/xfs_fsops.c
> > +++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_fsops.c
> > @@ -191,18 +191,15 @@ xfs_growfs_data_private(
> > */
> > int
> > xfs_update_secondary_supers(
> > - xfs_mount_t *mp)
> > + struct xfs_mount *mp)
> > {
> > - int error, saved_error;
> > + struct xfs_buf *bp;
> > xfs_agnumber_t agno;
> > - xfs_buf_t *bp;
> > + int error, saved_error;
> >
> > error = saved_error = 0;
> >
> > for (agno = 1; agno < mp->m_sb.sb_agcount; agno++) {
> > - error = xfs_trans_read_buf(mp, NULL, mp->m_ddev_targp,
> > - XFS_AGB_TO_DADDR(mp, agno, XFS_SB_BLOCK(mp)),
> > - XFS_FSS_TO_BB(mp, 1), 0, &bp, &xfs_sb_buf_ops);
> > /*
> > * If we get an error reading or writing alternate superblocks,
> > * continue. xfs_repair chooses the "best" superblock based
> > @@ -210,6 +207,7 @@ xfs_update_secondary_supers(
> > * superblocks un-updated than updated, and xfs_repair may
> > * pick them over the properly-updated primary.
> > */
> > + error = xfs_sb_read_secondary(mp, NULL, agno, &bp);
> > if (error) {
> > xfs_warn(mp,
> > "error %d reading secondary superblock for ag %d",
>
> Why change this now when my growfs patchset ireworks it and then
> moves the function entirely? Doing this now just breaks that
> patchset unnecessarily and forces another rebase - can we move this
> to the end of the growfs patchset?
The label stuff will come after your growfs stuff... maybe I'll try this
again tomorrow when I'm more awake.
Scrub wants a function to read a secondary sb, and a second one to clone
the primary to fix damage by getting the sb, formatting the incore sb
into the buffer, and writing it to disk.
Label wants a function to read each secondary sb, format the incore sb
into the buffer, and write it to disk.
Growfs wants to (read an existing ag's secondary sb | get a new ag's
sb), format the incore sb into the buffer, and write it to disk.
Does that sound right?
--D
> Cheers,
>
> Dave.
> --
> Dave Chinner
> david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> --
> 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
