On 10/23/18 10:10 AM, Eric Sandeen wrote:
> On 10/11/18 2:44 PM, Stefan Ring wrote:
>> The processing for data zeroing was never added to process_multi_fsb_objects.
>> It is now the same thing that process_single_fsb_objects does.
>
> First, thanks for doing this, seems about right.
>
> But I could use more changelog words here. ;)
>
> AFAICT, the intent was for process_multi_fsb_objects to call
> process_dir_data_block() in order to handle the zeroing for multi-fsb
> objects, so at least some of the cases /were/ handled, right?
>
> Your patch seems to be splitting that 3 ways, so we go to
> process_dir_free_block or process_dir_leaf_block or process_dir_data_block,
> the first two are new cases that are now handled? (I do see that this is
> the same as the process_single_fsb_objects code.)
>
> Given the old case:
>
> if ((!obfuscate && !zero_stale_data) ||
> o >= mp->m_dir_geo->leafblk) {
> ret = write_buf(iocur_top);
>
> it looks like we were just directly writing the leaf blocks and
> never obfuscating them, is that correct? I guess I need to go make
> some test filesystems... do you know from your testing if this is true?
Whoops, I forgot what directory leaf blocks were, sorry - there is nothing
to obfuscate in them. (but there may be data to zero in them...)
-Eric
