[Top] [All Lists]

Re: mkfs.xfs pagefault when removed storage during operation

To: Ajeet Yadav <ajeet.yadav.77@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: mkfs.xfs pagefault when removed storage during operation
From: Alex Elder <aelder@xxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 07 Feb 2011 19:35:31 -0600
Cc: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <AANLkTi=7dw1-r8BSdv7y51LzmWekxKjLrCv_Rky7EYx9@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <AANLkTi=wi_Fhr5v1J4wopvFTY=hC2EA_QmJu4Uc_XgGs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <AANLkTi=7dw1-r8BSdv7y51LzmWekxKjLrCv_Rky7EYx9@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Reply-to: aelder@xxxxxxx
On Wed, 2011-02-02 at 17:09 +0900, Ajeet Yadav wrote:
> If I see the current sigfault, its easy to fix adding one more patch
> to xfsprogs.
. . .
> But when I start reviewing the complete project w.r.t read() /
> read64() / write() / write64() more importantly libxfs_readbufr() /
> libxfs_writebufr().
> I find error handing is broken at may places and I get my self lost in
> m^n complexity also errno is lost.. therefore caller cannot examine
> the exact error,
> Back again I think, What if I exit on error ? Does xfsprogs uses
> read() / write() error as a part of its functionality, for example
> does xfs_repair uses these errors as a part of repair funtionality.
. . .

I think these are good observations and questions.

This doesn't answer your questions, but I want to mention to
you that libxfs is just about to have a major update that
affects lots of files.  I expect the update will *not*
address the issues you point out here, but I guess what I'd
like to do is get us moved to the updated code before trying
to address problems that might be widespread like this.

I hope to complete this update process soon, but I expect
it will be a week or more before that happens.


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