> Also, thank you both for the extensive review and ideas during the > development of this series. It was really appreciated! > Thank you for your appreciated effort! It was a wild journey through some interesting experiments, but you survived it well ;-) Would you be interested in pursuing FAN_WB_ERROR after a due rest and after all the dust on FAN_FS_ERROR has settled? FAN_WB_ERROR can use the same info record and same internal error event struct as FAN_FS_ERROR. A call to fsnotify_wb_error(sb, inode, err) can be placed inside mapping_set_error() and maybe for other sporadic callers of errseq_set(). For wb error, we can consider storing a snapshot of errseq of the sb/inode in the sb/inode mark and compute error_count from the errseq diff instead of counting it when merging events. This will keep a more accurate report even when error reports are dropped due to allocation failure or event queue overflow. I have a feeling that the Postgres project would find this functionality useful (?). Thanks, Amir.
