On Fri, Aug 11, 2006 at 10:43:12AM -0700, Zach Brown wrote:
>
> So, I was lost in fs/direct-io.c chasing yet another bug when I noticed
> that a recent unrelated change might have changed the semantics of the
> end_io() call.
>
> http://www.kernel.org/hg/linux-2.6/?cs=34c151cf341f
>
> Notice how that changes the aio path to set 'transferred' to -EIO based
> on dio->io_error before calling dio_complete() instead of after, like
> the sync path does with its possibly negative 'ret'.
>
> So it looks like xfs_end_io_direct() can now get a -ve size if, say,
> someone unplugs a drive part-way through a dio+aio write. There's an
> ASSERT() in there that makes me wonder if this is something we should be
> worrying about.
Its harmless. It was written when there was no way a negative byte
count would be coming back at us from the dio code. We should simply
remove the assert.
cheers.
--
Nathan
|