From: Matthew Wilcox Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] fsfreeze: manage kill signal when sb_start_write is called Date: Sat, 6 Apr 2013 07:17:03 -0600 Message-ID: <20130406131703.GC28744@parisc-linux.org> References: <515FF344.8040705@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Linux FS Devel , Chris Mason , Steve French , Theodore Ts'o , Andreas Dilger , Miklos Szeredi , Alexander Viro , Anton Altaparmakov , Mark Fasheh , Joel Becker , Ben Myers , Alex Elder , xfs@oss.sgi.com, Mike Snitzer , Alasdair G Kergon , linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-cifs@vger.kernel.org, samba-technical@lists.samba.org, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, fuse-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-ntfs-dev@lists.sourceforge.net, ocfs2-devel@oss.oracle.com, linux-mm@kvack.org, Jan Kara To: Marco Stornelli Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <515FF344.8040705@gmail.com> Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ext4.vger.kernel.org On Sat, Apr 06, 2013 at 12:04:52PM +0200, Marco Stornelli wrote: > In every place where sb_start_write was called now we must manage > the error code and return -EINTR. If we must manage the error code, then these functions should be marked __must_check. -- Matthew Wilcox Intel Open Source Technology Centre "Bill, look, we understand that you're interested in selling us this operating system, but compare it to ours. We can't possibly take such a retrograde step."