Hi, On Tue, 13 Jun 2023, at 04:20, Jeff Layton wrote: > The point here would be to bring NFS more into line with how other > filesystems behave. As Chris pointed out, other filesystems don't report > an error on a new write() just because there was an earlier, unseen > writeback error on the same inode. > > I think we can achieve this by carving out another flag bit from the > errseq_t counter. I'm building and testing a patch now, and I'll post it > once I'm convinced it's sane. Just wondering if anything has happened regarding this issue. I saw "[RFC PATCH] errseq_t: split the ERRSEQ_SEEN flag into two" on the list but that didn't seem to get any attention. The current behaviour is really quite surprising because if you have the following sequence: 1. quota hit or remote disk runs out of space 2. write() returns 0 3. close() [1] 4. space freed 5. write() returns ENOSPC and then read the file, you'll see the contents from the write in (5) and *not* the write in (2), even though the write in (5) is the one that returned an error. [1]: this returns ENOSPC too, but it seems like we're assuming applications don't check the result of close() -- Hao Wei
