On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 09:59:37AM -0500, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Wed, Nov 24, 2010 at 01:06:14AM +1100, npiggin@xxxxxxxxx wrote: > > Otherwise we think the inode is clean even if syncing failed. > > The patch itself looks fine, but I'm not sure it's enough. If we do > an synchronous writeout it could fail long after ->write_inode > has returned. Oh there are lots of holes in this buggy POS. Still more that I haven't fixed, even before you think about error cases. But, after a *successful* ->write_inode (whether sync or async), then the filesystem is not going to get any more, unless they mark the inode dirty again. I think that's fine, so long as the dirty buffers or whatever are properly synced at sync(2) / fsync(2) time. -- 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
