"hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > On Sat, Apr 23, 2016 at 06:08:37PM +0000, Verma, Vishal L wrote: >> direct_IO might fail with -EINVAL due to misalignment, or -ENOMEM due >> to some allocation failing, and I thought we should return the original >> -EIO in such cases so that the application doesn't lose the information >> that the bad block is actually causing the error. > > EINVAL is a concern here. Not due to the right error reported, but > because it means your current scheme is fundamentally broken - we > need to support I/O at any alignment for DAX I/O, and not fail due to > alignbment concernes for a highly specific degraded case. > > I think this whole series need to go back to the drawing board as I > don't think it can actually rely on using direct I/O as the EIO > fallback. The only callers of dax_do_io are direct_IO methods. Cheers, Jeff -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>