>> I was talking to Eric about this larger "recovery on read-only >> mount" problem last week on IRC - I can't find it my logs right now, >> but IIRC I'd suggested that we should always run xfs_mountfs() >> in read-write mount if the underlying device can be written to, >> and then once that is complete do a rw->ro transition exactly as we >> do for a remount,ro operation. > > Yeah, I have a larger patchset to try to handle this and other > related processing that wasn't happening on ro mounts. I got > derailed because my regression test for it ran into all kinds > of unexpected new & unrelated bugs. So I haven't sent it yet... > > There were lots of little bits here and there stemming, I think, > from old Irix code that didn't do /any/ device IO on a ro mount. > > -Eric It's glad to hear that you have nearly completed the ro mount patchset, so I will stop reworking on this problem. During the rework, I found two puzzling XFS_MOUNT_RDONLY checkings at xfs_release(...) and xfs_inactive(...). In my opinion these check should be done at VFS instead of the specific filesystem, so why these XFS_MOUNT_RDONLY checkings there are ? Could we move the needed check to VFS just like the things sb_prepare_remount_readonly() have done ? Tao -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-xfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
