On Thu, 5 Jun 2008 10:29:48 -0400 Theodore Tso <tytso@mit.edu> wrote:

quoted text
> On Thu, Jun 05, 2008 at 08:33:27PM +0900, Hidehiro Kawai wrote:
> > 
> > My patch doesn't change the policy.  JBD aborts the journal when
> > it detects I/O error in file data since 2.6.11.  Perhaps this patch:
> > http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=110483888632225
> > I just added missing error checkings.
> > 
> 
> Looking at the code paths touched by patch you referenced, you are
> correct.  And Andrew even signed off on it.  :-)
> 
> But if someone was only examining the patch, it wasn't obvious that
> the journal was getting aborted when the JBD layer was forcing buffers
> from t_sync_datalist to disk.  So I suspect the change went in without
> proper consideration of the net effect.  You just called it out
> explicitly in the subject line, which caused Andrew to ask some good
> questions; questions that weren't asked in 2005.

Sigh. An object lesson in the value of good changelogging :(

I guess we need to undo this.  And yes, propagating errors into AS_EIO
is the way.  I guess that's safe without holding lock_page(), as long
as the bh is pinned.

--
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/