xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [patch 0/9] writeback data integrity and other fixes (take 3)

To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [patch 0/9] writeback data integrity and other fixes (take 3)
From: Nick Piggin <npiggin@xxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2008 10:21:43 +0100
Cc: akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx, linux-fsdevel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Chris Mason <chris.mason@xxxxxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <20081029091203.GA32545@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <20081028144715.683011000@xxxxxxx> <20081028153953.GB3082@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20081028222746.GB4985@disturbed> <20081029001653.GF15599@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20081029031645.GE4985@disturbed> <20081029091203.GA32545@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.9i
On Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 05:12:03AM -0400, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 02:16:45PM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > Yeah, that'd do it. Good catch. I can't believe I recently fixed a
> > bug that touched these lines of code without noticing the inversion.
> > Sometimes I wonder if we should just conver the entire of XFS to
> > return negative errors - mistakes in handling negative error numbers
> > in the core XFS code happen all the time.
> > 
> > FWIW, the core issue here is that we've got to do the
> > filemap_fdatawait() call in the ->fsync method because ->fsync
> > gets called before we've waited for the data I/O to complete.
> > XFS updates inode state on I/O completion, so we *must* wait
> > for data I/O to complete before logging the inode changes. I
> > think btrfs has the same problem....
> 
> Yes.  I have patches to fix this by changing what ->fsync does and
> how it's called.  I really need to get them out on the list.

Please do.

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