On Mon, Nov 30, 2020 at 07:38:04PM -0800, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > + if (!xfs_verify_ino(mp, rmap->me_owner) && > + !XFS_RMAP_NON_INODE_OWNER(rmap->me_owner)) > + return false; Wouldn't it make sense to reverse the order of the checks here? > + end = rmap->me_startblock + rmap->me_len - 1; > + if (!xfs_verify_fsbno(mp, rmap->me_startblock) || > + !xfs_verify_fsbno(mp, end)) > return false; Nit: why not simply: if (!xfs_verify_fsbno(mp, rmap->me_startblock)) return false; if (!xfs_verify_fsbno(mp, rmap->me_startblock + rmap->me_len - 1)) return false; ?