> things like ->remount_fs or ->put_super. So avoiding IO from operations
> like these would rely on fs implementation anyway.
I think that needs to remain filesystem specific and I don't think this
needs to hold up the patchset.
> Right, -EROFS isn't really good return value when we refuse also reads. I
> think -EIO is fine. -ESHUTDOWN would be ok but the standard message ("Cannot
> send after transport endpoint shutdown") whould be IMO confusing to users.
> I was also thinking about -EFSCORRUPTED (alias -EUCLEAN) which already has
> some precedens in the filesystem space but -EIO is probably better.
EIO isn't great but I agree that it's the best we probably have for now.
