On Mon, 14 Jul 2008 10:08:24 -0400 "Mike Snitzer" <snitzer@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 5:17 AM, Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > wrote: > > > On Tue, 10 Jun 2008 17:51:35 +0900 Hidehiro Kawai < > > hidehiro.kawai.ez@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > Hello Andrew, > > > > > > akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > > > > > > > The patch titled > > > > jbd: strictly check for write errors on data buffers > > > > has been removed from the -mm tree. Its filename was > > > > jbd-strictly-check-for-write-errors-on-data-buffers.patch > > > > > > > > This patch was dropped because I don't think we want to go read-only on > > file data write errors > > > > > > > > The current -mm tree may be found at > > http://userweb.kernel.org/~akpm/mmotm/<http://userweb.kernel.org/%7Eakpm/mmotm/> > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------ > > > > Subject: jbd: strictly check for write errors on data buffers > > > > From: Hidehiro Kawai <hidehiro.kawai.ez@xxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > This patch series doesn't change the behavior on file data write > > > errors as I stated before, but we found that the current behavior has > > > been made accidentally. So yesterday I sent an additional patch(*) > > > which removes the invocation of journal_abort() and thus stop making > > > the fs read-only on file data write errors, but it seems to be late > > > for the -mm release preparation. > > > > > > Patch(*) can be found at: > > > http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=121300618614453&w=2 > > > > > > Anyway, as this patch series was dropped from -mm, I'm going to > > > send a revised version. > > > > > > I plan to separate these pathces into three patche set. > > > The first patch (set) corrects the current behavior in ordered > > > writes, it means it removes the invocation of journal_abort() on file > > > data write errors. It is the almost same as the patch(*). > > > The second patch set fixes error handlings for metadata writes and > > > checkpointing. It should be applied independently of the first > > > patch set, and it is the same as PATCH 3/5 to 5/5. > > > The third patch set makes "abort the journal on file data write errors" > > > tunable for mission critical users. Of course, this feature depends > > > on the first patch set. > > > > > > > That sounds like a good plan, thanks. > > > Hidehiro and Andrew, > > The first patch(set) has been in -mm with the following patches: > jbd-dont-abort-if-flushing-file-data-failed.patch > jbd-dont-abort-if-flushing-file-data-failed-fix.patch > > "PATCH 3/5 to 5/5" haven't made their way into -mm; nor has the tunable > "abort the journal on file data write errors". Where do things stand on > this work? > > Given the potential for corruption and the fact that -mm's series file > justifiably has a place-holder comment of "jbd write-error stuff: scary" I'm > wondering: how soon will all associated fixes be included in -mm? I assume they'll be resent if/when they're ready? -- 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
