Hello, James. On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 10:39:37AM -0800, James Bottomley wrote: > The specific worry is the writeback cache. If the flush fails and we > power down with dirty blocks in the cache, those blocks are lost but the > filesystem still thinks they're committed. I think as long as you're > using flush barriers on your system, this isn't a problem, but if you're > not using barriers, it can lead to undetected corruption that blows up > later. If it were a choice between suspend my laptop and save my data, > I'd choose the latter. But the question is do we care ... perhaps we > can just say you have to use flush barriers if you want to suspend. Ooh, yeah, flush failure is special. That said, I think the right way to deal with that is marking the device as failed and fail writes / flushes afterwards instead of failing suspend. It's hightly unlikely the device is in any useable state after failing flushes anyway and failing suspend has potential to lead to pretty dramatic failure conditions (device overheating in the bag would be a common one) too. Thanks. -- tejun -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
