On 2019/3/26 上午1:06, David Sterba wrote: > On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 02:37:09PM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote: >> By function, chunk item verification is more suitable to be done inside >> tree-checker. >> >> So move btrfs_check_chunk_valid() to tree-checker.c and export it. >> >> And since it's now moved to tree-checker, also add a better comment for >> what this function is doing. >> >> Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo <w...@suse.com> >> --- >> fs/btrfs/tree-checker.c | 99 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> fs/btrfs/tree-checker.h | 3 ++ >> fs/btrfs/volumes.c | 94 +------------------------------------- >> 3 files changed, 103 insertions(+), 93 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/fs/btrfs/tree-checker.c b/fs/btrfs/tree-checker.c >> index b8cdaf472031..4e44323ae758 100644 >> --- a/fs/btrfs/tree-checker.c >> +++ b/fs/btrfs/tree-checker.c >> @@ -448,6 +448,105 @@ static int check_block_group_item(struct btrfs_fs_info >> *fs_info, >> return 0; >> } >> >> +/* >> + * The common chunk check which could also work on super block sys chunk >> array. >> + * >> + * Return -EUCLEAN if anything is corrupted. > > Well, that's still confusing if you say EUCLEAN in the commend and use > EIO in the code. > Oh, that EIO to EUCLEAN change is in later patch (3/9).
Do I need to resend the patchset? Thanks, Qu
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
