On Thu, Aug 22, 2024 at 10:43 AM Miklos Szeredi <miklos@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Thu, 22 Aug 2024 at 19:31, Joanne Koong <joannelkoong@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > For cases like these though, isn't the server already responsible for > > handling errors properly to avoid potential corruption if their reply > > to the request fails? In your example above, it seems like the server > > would already need to have the error handling in place to roll back > > the file creation if their fuse_reply_create() call returned an error > > (eg -EIO if copying out args in the kernel had an issue). > > No, the server does not need to implement rollback, and does not in > fact need to check for the return value of the fuse_reply_create() > call unless it wants to mess with interrupts (not enabled by default). > See libfuse/lib/fuse.c where most of the fuse_replu_XXX() calls just > ignore the return value. Ok, I see. For v5, I will update this to abort the connection altogether if a request times out. Thanks, Joanne > > Thanks, > Miklos
