Hi Joseph, On 2015/4/28 20:23, Joseph Qi wrote: > jbd2_journal_dirty_metadata may fail. Currently it cannot take care of > non zero return value and just BUG in ocfs2_journal_dirty. > This patch is aborting the handle instead of BUG. > > Signed-off-by: Joseph Qi <joseph...@huawei.com> > --- > fs/ocfs2/journal.c | 10 +++++++++- > 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/fs/ocfs2/journal.c b/fs/ocfs2/journal.c > index ff53192..4482420 100644 > --- a/fs/ocfs2/journal.c > +++ b/fs/ocfs2/journal.c > @@ -775,7 +775,15 @@ void ocfs2_journal_dirty(handle_t *handle, struct > buffer_head *bh) > trace_ocfs2_journal_dirty((unsigned long long)bh->b_blocknr); > > status = jbd2_journal_dirty_metadata(handle, bh); > - BUG_ON(status); > + if (status) { > + mlog_errno(status); > + if (!is_handle_aborted(handle)) { > + handle->h_err = status; > + mlog(ML_ERROR, "jbd2_journal_dirty_metadata failed. " > + "Aborting transaction."); > + jbd2_journal_abort_handle(handle); The buffers dirtied before are still committed to disk while handle is aborted and may cause some inconsistency. Maybe the journal should also be set aborted if jbd2_journal_dirty_metadata fails like ext4? > + } > + } > } > > #define OCFS2_DEFAULT_COMMIT_INTERVAL (HZ * > JBD2_DEFAULT_MAX_COMMIT_AGE) >
_______________________________________________ Ocfs2-devel mailing list Ocfs2-devel@oss.oracle.com https://oss.oracle.com/mailman/listinfo/ocfs2-devel