Re: [PATCH 1/4] f2fs: fix the recovery flow to handle errors correctly

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



2013/3/25, Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk.kim@xxxxxxxxxxx>:
> 2013-03-25 (월), 15:30 +0900, Namjae Jeon:
>> 2013/3/25, Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk.kim@xxxxxxxxxxx>:
>> > We should handle errors during the recovery flow correctly.
>> > For example, if we get -ENOMEM, we should report a mount failure instead
>> > of
>> > conducting the remained mount procedure.
>> >
>> > Signed-off-by: Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk.kim@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>> > ---
>> >  fs/f2fs/f2fs.h     |  2 +-
>> >  fs/f2fs/recovery.c | 46 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------------
>> >  fs/f2fs/super.c    |  9 +++++++--
>> >  3 files changed, 36 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-)
>> >
>> > diff --git a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h
>> > index 5bb87e0..109e12d 100644
>> > --- a/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h
>> > +++ b/fs/f2fs/f2fs.h
>> > @@ -1027,7 +1027,7 @@ void destroy_gc_caches(void);
>> >  /*
>> >   * recovery.c
>> >   */
>> > -void recover_fsync_data(struct f2fs_sb_info *);
>> > +int recover_fsync_data(struct f2fs_sb_info *);
>> >  bool space_for_roll_forward(struct f2fs_sb_info *);
>> >
>> >  /*
>> > diff --git a/fs/f2fs/recovery.c b/fs/f2fs/recovery.c
>> > index 2d86eb2..61bdaa7 100644
>> > --- a/fs/f2fs/recovery.c
>> > +++ b/fs/f2fs/recovery.c
>> > @@ -118,10 +118,8 @@ static int find_fsync_dnodes(struct f2fs_sb_info
>> > *sbi,
>> > struct list_head *head)
>> >
>> >  		lock_page(page);
>> >
>> Hi Jaegeuk.
>> I have a question.
>> > -		if (cp_ver != cpver_of_node(page)) {
>> > -			err = -EINVAL;
>> > +		if (cp_ver != cpver_of_node(page))
>> >  			goto unlock_out;
>> > -		}
>> err = 0 is initialized to zero in the start of function
>> Why have you remove err = -EINVAL; code when mismatching cp_ver ?
>
> This ending condition is used to find the latest node pages that we have
> to recover, not to detect an error to exit the recovery routine.
> For example, the error conditions include -ENOMEM or -EIO, something
> like such the obvious errors.
> Thanks,
Yes, Right. It does make sense.
Thanks for explanation :)

You can add:
Reviewed-by: Namjae Jeon <namjae.jeon@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>
>>
>> Thanks.
>> >
>> --
>> 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
>
> --
> Jaegeuk Kim
> Samsung
>
--
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




[Index of Archives]     [Linux Ext4 Filesystem]     [Union Filesystem]     [Filesystem Testing]     [Ceph Users]     [Ecryptfs]     [AutoFS]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Share Photos]     [Security]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux Cachefs]     [Reiser Filesystem]     [Linux RAID]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]     [CEPH Development]
  Powered by Linux