On Jul 17, 2008 10:43 -0400, Josef Bacik wrote: > Yeah thats a hard to answer question, one that I will leave up to others > who have been doing this much longer than I. My thought is remount-ro > is there to keep you from crashing, so if you have errors=continue then > you expect to live with the consequences. Course if that bit gets flipped > via corruption thats not good either. It shouldn't cause the kernel to crash, but it should definitely return an error to the application. This is probably one of the code paths that the Coverity folks were reporting on in FAST this year where on-disk errors are not propagated to the application. 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
