Re: [RESEND, PATCH v2] fuse: Don't drop NOTIFY_REPLY if we promised it

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Wed, Feb 27, 2019 at 9:39 PM Kirill Smelkov <kirr@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> I more or less agree with this statement. However can we please make the
> breakage to be explicitly visible with an error instead of exhibiting it
> via harder to debug stucks/deadlocks? For example sys_read < max_write
> -> error instead of getting stuck. And if notify_retrieve requests
> buffer larger than max_write -> error or cut to max_write, but don't
> return OK when we know we will never send what was requested to
> filesystem even if it uses max_write sized reads. What is the point of
> breaking in hard to diagnose way when we can make the breakage showing
> itself explicitly? Would a patch for such behaviour accepted?

Sure, if it's only adds a couple of lines.   Adding more than say ten
lines for such a non-bug fix is definitely excessive.

Thanks,
Miklos



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Ext4 Filesystem]     [Union Filesystem]     [Filesystem Testing]     [Ceph Users]     [Ecryptfs]     [AutoFS]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Share Photos]     [Security]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux Cachefs]     [Reiser Filesystem]     [Linux RAID]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]     [CEPH Development]

  Powered by Linux