On Mon, Mar 16, 2020 at 09:16:49AM -0400, Brian Foster wrote: > A comment would be useful here to indicate what this means (i.e., we can > assume v3 inode format). Sure. > The function name is a little vague too I > suppose (will the inode ever get larger than large? :P). I wonder if > something like _has_v3_inode() is more clear, but we can always change > it easily enough and either way is better than hascrc() IMO. I'm not too fond of the v3 name as the check also guards any newer version (but then again I hope we never need to rev the version..)
