[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH 3/3] Add timeout feature

To: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] Add timeout feature
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2008 10:37:49 -0400
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Takashi Sato <t-sato@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Ric Wheeler <rwheeler@xxxxxxxxxx>, Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@xxxxxxxxxx>, linux-fsdevel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, dm-devel@xxxxxxxxxx, viro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-ext4@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx, axboe@xxxxxxxxx, mtk.manpages@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <48E0E7D4.1090409@xxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <20080908205337t-sato@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20080908171119.GB22521@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <48DBFD42.6030307@xxxxxxxxxx> <D0B0D91F884647D6808626CDFF81E532@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20080929141326.GA31781@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <48E0E7D4.1090409@xxxxxxxxxxx>
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17)
On Mon, Sep 29, 2008 at 09:36:04AM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote:
> Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 05:52:35PM +0900, Takashi Sato wrote:
> >> I think that your concern is that the freezer cannot recognize the 
> >> occurrence
> >> of a timeout and it continues the backup process and the backup data is
> >> corrupted finally.
> > 
> > What timeout should happen?  the freeze ioctl must not return until the
> > filesystem is a clean state and all writes are blocked.
> The suggestion was that *UN*freeze would return ETIMEDOUT if the
> filesystem had already unfrozen itself, I think.  That way you know that
> the snapshot you just took is worthless, at least.

But why would the filesystem every unfreeze itself?  That defeats the
whole point of freezing it.

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>