Re: - jbd-strictly-check-for-write-errors-on-data-buffers.patchremoved from -mm tree

[Andrew Morton]

On Mon, 14 Jul 2008 10:08:24 -0400 "Mike Snitzer" <snitzer@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 5:17 AM, Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
> 
> > On Tue, 10 Jun 2008 17:51:35 +0900 Hidehiro Kawai <
> > hidehiro.kawai.ez@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > > Hello Andrew,
> > >
> > > akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> > >
> > > > The patch titled
> > > >      jbd: strictly check for write errors on data buffers
> > > > has been removed from the -mm tree.  Its filename was
> > > >      jbd-strictly-check-for-write-errors-on-data-buffers.patch
> > > >
> > > > This patch was dropped because I don't think we want to go read-only on
> > file data write errors
> > > >
> > > > The current -mm tree may be found at
> > http://userweb.kernel.org/~akpm/mmotm/<http://userweb.kernel.org/%7Eakpm/mmotm/>
> > > >
> > > > ------------------------------------------------------
> > > > Subject: jbd: strictly check for write errors on data buffers
> > > > From: Hidehiro Kawai <hidehiro.kawai.ez@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > >
> > > This patch series doesn't change the behavior on file data write
> > > errors as I stated before, but we found that the current behavior has
> > > been made accidentally.  So yesterday I sent an additional patch(*)
> > > which removes the invocation of journal_abort() and thus stop making
> > > the fs read-only on file data write errors, but it seems to be late
> > > for the -mm release preparation.
> > >
> > >   Patch(*) can be found at:
> > >   http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=121300618614453&w=2
> > >
> > > Anyway, as this patch series was dropped from -mm, I'm going to
> > > send a revised version.
> > >
> > > I plan to separate these pathces into three patche set.
> > > The first patch (set) corrects the current behavior in ordered
> > > writes, it means it removes the invocation of journal_abort() on file
> > > data write errors.  It is the almost same as the patch(*).
> > > The second patch set fixes error handlings for metadata writes and
> > > checkpointing.  It should be applied independently of the first
> > > patch set, and it is the same as PATCH 3/5 to 5/5.
> > > The third patch set makes "abort the journal on file data write errors"
> > > tunable for mission critical users.  Of course, this feature depends
> > > on the first patch set.
> > >
> >
> > That sounds like a good plan, thanks.
> 
> 
> Hidehiro and Andrew,
> 
> The first patch(set) has been in -mm with the following patches:
> jbd-dont-abort-if-flushing-file-data-failed.patch
> jbd-dont-abort-if-flushing-file-data-failed-fix.patch
> 
> "PATCH 3/5 to 5/5" haven't made their way into -mm; nor has the tunable
> "abort the journal on file data write errors".  Where do things stand on
> this work?
> 
> Given the potential for corruption and the fact that -mm's series file
> justifiably has a place-holder comment of "jbd write-error stuff: scary" I'm
> wondering: how soon will all associated fixes be included in -mm?

I assume they'll be resent if/when they're ready?
--
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/