On 06/22/2018 06:48 PM, David Sterba wrote:
On Fri, Jun 22, 2018 at 10:58:16AM +0800, Chengguang Xu wrote:
Currently, when encoutering -ERANGE in btrfs_get_acl(),
just set acl to NULL so that we cannot get proper
acl information but the operation looks successful.
Do you have a reproducer for
On Fri, Jun 22, 2018 at 10:58:16AM +0800, Chengguang Xu wrote:
> Currently, when encoutering -ERANGE in btrfs_get_acl(),
> just set acl to NULL so that we cannot get proper
> acl information but the operation looks successful.
Do you have a reproducer for that?
ERANGE is returned from
On 2018年06月22日 15:42, cgxu519 wrote:
> On 06/22/2018 01:59 PM, Qu Wenruo wrote:
>>
>> On 2018年06月22日 10:58, Chengguang Xu wrote:
>>> Currently, when encoutering -ERANGE in btrfs_get_acl(),
>>> just set acl to NULL so that we cannot get proper
>>> acl information but the operation looks
On 06/22/2018 01:59 PM, Qu Wenruo wrote:
On 2018年06月22日 10:58, Chengguang Xu wrote:
Currently, when encoutering -ERANGE in btrfs_get_acl(),
just set acl to NULL so that we cannot get proper
acl information but the operation looks successful.
This patch treats -ERANGE as an error case and
On 2018年06月22日 10:58, Chengguang Xu wrote:
> Currently, when encoutering -ERANGE in btrfs_get_acl(),
> just set acl to NULL so that we cannot get proper
> acl information but the operation looks successful.
>
> This patch treats -ERANGE as an error case and meanwhile
> print real errno before
Currently, when encoutering -ERANGE in btrfs_get_acl(),
just set acl to NULL so that we cannot get proper
acl information but the operation looks successful.
This patch treats -ERANGE as an error case and meanwhile
print real errno before translating errno to -EIO.
Signed-off-by: Chengguang Xu
