On 8/20/14, 11:49 PM, Dave Chinner wrote: > On Wed, Aug 20, 2014 at 11:36:40PM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote: >> On 8/20/14, 10:18 PM, Eric Sandeen wrote: >>> In xlog_do_recovery_pass(), there are 2 distinct cases: >>> non-wrapped and wrapped log recovery. >>> >>> If we find a wrapped log, we recover around the end >>> of the log, and then handle the rest of recovery >>> exactly as in the non-wrapped case - using exactly the same >>> (duplicated) code. >>> >>> Rather than having the same code in both cases, we can >>> get the wrapped portion out of the way first if needed, >>> and then recover the non-wrapped portion of the log. >>> >>> There should be no functional change here, just code >>> reorganization & deduplication. >>> >>> The patch looks a bit bigger than it really is; the last >>> hunk is whitespace changes (un-indenting). >>> >>> Tested with xfstests "check -g log" on a stock configuration. >> >> which didn't actually hit any log wraps. Does xfstests >> really not cover wrapped log recovery? anyway, something like this >> on a small log: > > xfs/016 AFAICT that doesn't ever run recovery... -Eric _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
