On 11/12/2010 10:52 AM, Jeff Layton wrote:
Now, process A issues an fsync. He gets an error but his data was flushed to disk just fine. Is that also incorrect behavior?
I suspect it is better for fsync to return an error when it wasn't process A's error (but there was an error), than to pretend everything was just fine when in fact an error did happen. When getting an error, the program can retry the write (to redirty the pages) and retry the IO by calling fsync again. If no real error happened, at worst it gets to do the IO twice. -- All rights reversed -- 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
