On Jun 05, 2008 09:20 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Thu, 5 Jun 2008 10:29:48 -0400 Theodore Tso <tytso@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > 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 :( ... and the value of "diff -p" so it is clear what function is being changed. > 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. Something like the following instead if -EIO and journal abort: if (!buffer_uptodate(bh)) { set_bit(AS_EIO, &bh->b_page->mapping->flags); SetPageError(bh->b_page); } It seems end_buffer_async_write() does this already, but journal_do_submit_data() uses end_buffer_write_sync() and it does not do either of those operations. Cheers, Andreas -- Andreas Dilger Sr. Staff Engineer, Lustre Group Sun Microsystems of Canada, Inc. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
