Re: [PATCH] Use of getblk differs between locations

[Anton Altaparmakov]

On Mon, 2005-10-10 at 18:07 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> Mikulas Patocka <mikulas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> >  On Mon, 10 Oct 2005, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > 
> >  > Anton Altaparmakov <aia21@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >  >>
> >  >> > Maybe the best solution is neither one nor another. Testing and failing
> >  >> > gracefully seems better.
> >  >> >
> >  >> > What do you think?
> >  >>
> >  >>  I certainly agree with you there.  I neither want a deadlock nor
> >  >>  corruption.  (-:
> >  >
> >  > Yup.  In the present implementation __getblk_slow() "cannot fail".  It's
> >  > conceivable that at some future stage we'll change __getblk_slow() so that
> >  > it returns NULL on an out-of-memory condition.
> > 
> >  The question is if it is desired --- it will make bread return NULL on 
> >  out-of-memory condition, callers will treat it like an IO error, skipping 
> >  access to the affected block, causing damage on perfectly healthy 
> >  filesystem.
> 
> Yes, that is a bit dumb.  A filesystem might indeed want to take different
> action for ENOMEM versus EIO.
> 
> >  I liked what linux-2.0 did in this case --- if the kernel was out of 
> >  memory, getblk just took another buffer, wrote it if it was dirty and used 
> >  it. Except for writeable loopback device (where writing one buffer 
> >  generates more dirty buffers), it couldn't deadlock.
> 
> Wouldn't it be better if bread() were to return ERR_PTR(-EIO) or
> ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM)?    Big change.

It would indeed.  Much better.  And whilst at it, it would be even
better if we had a lot more error codes like "ERR_PTR(-EDEVUNPLUGGED)"
for example...  But that would be an even better change.  Anyone feeling
like touching every block driver in the kernel?  (-;

Best regards,

        Anton
-- 
Anton Altaparmakov <aia21 at cam.ac.uk> (replace at with @)
Unix Support, Computing Service, University of Cambridge, CB2 3QH, UK
Linux NTFS maintainer / IRC: #ntfs on irc.freenode.net
WWW: http://linux-ntfs.sf.net/ & http://www-stu.christs.cam.ac.uk/~aia21/

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/