On Fri, 2011-06-10 at 22:04 +0800, Wu Fengguang wrote:
> It's confusing to return success while redirtying the inode at the
> same time in ->write_inode(). Return -EAGAIN to indicate that we've
> not finished with this inode.
>
> Impact: it's a cleanup, not bug fix.
>
> CC: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> fs/nfs/write.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> --- linux-next.orig/fs/nfs/write.c 2011-06-10 21:52:34.000000000 +0800
> +++ linux-next/fs/nfs/write.c 2011-06-10 21:52:37.000000000 +0800
> @@ -1521,7 +1521,7 @@ static int nfs_commit_unstable_pages(str
> {
> struct nfs_inode *nfsi = NFS_I(inode);
> int flags = FLUSH_SYNC;
> - int ret = 0;
> + int ret = -EAGAIN;
>
> if (wbc->sync_mode == WB_SYNC_NONE) {
> /* Don't commit yet if this is a non-blocking flush and there
Looks good, but since this is a cleanup, I'm queueing it for 3.1 rather
than pushing it in the regression-fixing window.
Cheers
Trond
--
Trond Myklebust
Linux NFS client maintainer
NetApp
Trond.Myklebust@xxxxxxxxxx
www.netapp.com
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
