Nick Piggin <npiggin@xxxxxxx> writes: > IO error handling in the core mm/fs still doesn't seem perfect, but with > the recent round of patches and this one, it should be getting on the > right track. > > I kind of get the feeling some people would rather forget about all this > and brush it under the carpet. Hopefully I'm mistaken, but if anybody > disagrees with my assertion that error handling, and data integrity > semantics are first-class correctness issues, and therefore are more > important than all other non-correctness problems... speak now and let's > discuss that, please. > > Otherwise, unless anybody sees obvious problems with this, hopefully it > can go into -mm for some wider testing (I've tested it with a few filesystems > so far and no immediate problems) I think the first step to get these more robust in the future would be to have a standard regression test testing these paths. Otherwise it'll bit-rot sooner or later again. -Andi -- ak@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
