On 2/13/14, 6:27 PM, Dave Chinner wrote: > Looks fine. I'll run it through some testing and we can go from > there. FWIW, does this make your "check the sector size in the sb > verifier" patch redundant? Well, it'll be safe for the primary SB, but I assume that a corrupted secondary would still trip things up. I think that at this point we can switch to using BBTOB(bp->b_length) in the verifier and be safe. I'll look into it. -Eric > Cheers, > > Dave. > _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
