Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751517AbdGZWW6 (ORCPT ); Wed, 26 Jul 2017 18:22:58 -0400 Received: from mail-qk0-f178.google.com ([209.85.220.178]:36739 "EHLO mail-qk0-f178.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751040AbdGZWW4 (ORCPT ); Wed, 26 Jul 2017 18:22:56 -0400 Message-ID: <1501107773.15159.6.camel@redhat.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/4] gfs2: convert to errseq_t based writeback error reporting for fsync From: Jeff Layton To: Matthew Wilcox , Jeff Layton Cc: Alexander Viro , Jan Kara , "J . Bruce Fields" , Andrew Morton , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, Bob Peterson , Steven Whitehouse , cluster-devel@redhat.com Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2017 18:22:53 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20170726192105.GD15980@bombadil.infradead.org> References: <20170726175538.13885-1-jlayton@kernel.org> <20170726175538.13885-5-jlayton@kernel.org> <20170726192105.GD15980@bombadil.infradead.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.24.4 (3.24.4-1.fc26) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1155 Lines: 37 On Wed, 2017-07-26 at 12:21 -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > On Wed, Jul 26, 2017 at 01:55:38PM -0400, Jeff Layton wrote: > > @@ -668,12 +668,14 @@ static int gfs2_fsync(struct file *file, loff_t start, loff_t end, > > if (ret) > > return ret; > > if (gfs2_is_jdata(ip)) > > - filemap_write_and_wait(mapping); > > + ret = file_write_and_wait(file); > > + if (ret) > > + return ret; > > gfs2_ail_flush(ip->i_gl, 1); > > } > > Do we want to skip flushing the AIL if there was an error (possibly > previously encountered)? I'd think we'd want to flush the AIL then report > the error, like this: > I wondered about that. Note that earlier in the function, we also bail out without flushing the AIL if sync_inode_metadata fails, so I assumed that we'd want to do the same here. I could definitely be wrong and am fine with changing it if so. Discarding the error like we do today seems wrong though. Bob, thoughts? > if (gfs2_is_jdata(ip)) > - filemap_write_and_wait(mapping); > + ret = file_write_and_wait(file); > gfs2_ail_flush(ip->i_gl, 1); > + if (ret) > + return ret; > } -- Jeff Layton