On Wed 10-05-17 08:19:50, Jeff Layton wrote: > On Wed, 2017-05-10 at 13:48 +0200, Jan Kara wrote: > > On Tue 09-05-17 11:49:17, Jeff Layton wrote: > > > diff --git a/fs/file_table.c b/fs/file_table.c > > > index 954d510b765a..d6138b6411ff 100644 > > > --- a/fs/file_table.c > > > +++ b/fs/file_table.c > > > @@ -168,6 +168,7 @@ struct file *alloc_file(const struct path *path, fmode_t mode, > > > file->f_path = *path; > > > file->f_inode = path->dentry->d_inode; > > > file->f_mapping = path->dentry->d_inode->i_mapping; > > > + file->f_wb_err = filemap_sample_wb_error(file->f_mapping); > > > > Why do you sample here when you also sample in do_dentry_open()? I didn't > > find any alloc_file() callers that would possibly care about writeback > > errors... > > > > Honza > > I basically used the setting of f_mapping as a guideline as to where to > sample it for initialization. My thinking was that if f_mapping ever > ended up different then you'd probably also want f_wb_err to be > resampled anyway. OK, makes sense. > I can drop this hunk if you think we don't need it. I don't really care. I was just wondering whether I'm missing something... Honza -- Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxxx> SUSE Labs, CR -- 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>
