Mike Snitzer 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? Hello Mike, Sorry for my late work. I'm going to send these two patch set soon, but I have a trouble, 2.6.26-rc8-mm1 doesn't boot on my box. So it may a bit more delay. Regards, -- Hidehiro Kawai Hitachi, Systems Development Laboratory Linux Technology Center -- 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
