Re: [PATCH -next,v2] fuse: return the more nuanced writeback error on close()

[Miklos Szeredi <miklos@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Mon, 23 May 2022 at 03:35, ChenXiaoSong <chenxiaosong2@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> As filemap_check_errors() only report -EIO or -ENOSPC, we return more nuanced
> writeback error -(file->f_mapping->wb_err & MAX_ERRNO).
>
>   filemap_write_and_wait
>     filemap_write_and_wait_range
>       filemap_check_errors
>         -ENOSPC or -EIO
>   filemap_check_wb_err
>     errseq_check
>       return -(file->f_mapping->wb_err & MAX_ERRNO)
>
> Signed-off-by: ChenXiaoSong <chenxiaosong2@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>  fs/fuse/file.c | 4 ++--
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/fuse/file.c b/fs/fuse/file.c
> index f18d14d5fea1..9917bc2795e6 100644
> --- a/fs/fuse/file.c
> +++ b/fs/fuse/file.c
> @@ -488,10 +488,10 @@ static int fuse_flush(struct file *file, fl_owner_t id)
>         inode_unlock(inode);
>
>         err = filemap_check_errors(file->f_mapping);
> +       /* return more nuanced writeback errors */
>         if (err)
> -               return err;
> +               return filemap_check_wb_err(file->f_mapping, 0);

I'm wondering if this should be file_check_and_advance_wb_err() instead.

Is there a difference between ->flush() and ->fsync()?

Jeff, can you please help?

Thanks,
Miklos