On Tue, Mar 01, 2016 at 01:04:58PM -0600, Eric Sandeen wrote: > Should that assert even be there? Looks like it's gracefully > handled, I don't see offhand that anything should have caught > this corruption earlier, and we don't really want to bug on disk > corruption. Am I missing something? We used to have a couple of these, especially in log recovery - whoever wrote this code probably though trapping on these corruptions for a debug kernel makes sense. I'm fine with dropping them, and a little audit for more of them might not hurt. _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
