Re: [PATCH v6 12/20] fs: add a new fstype flag to indicate how writeback errors are tracked

2017-06-15 Thread Jeff Layton
On Thu, 2017-06-15 at 07:57 -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Thu, Jun 15, 2017 at 06:42:12AM -0400, Jeff Layton wrote: > > Correct. > > > > But if there is a data writeback error, should we report an error on all > > open fds at that time (like we will for fsync)? > > We should in theory,

Re: [PATCH v6 12/20] fs: add a new fstype flag to indicate how writeback errors are tracked

2017-06-15 Thread Christoph Hellwig
On Thu, Jun 15, 2017 at 06:42:12AM -0400, Jeff Layton wrote: > Correct. > > But if there is a data writeback error, should we report an error on all > open fds at that time (like we will for fsync)? We should in theory, but I don't see how to properly do it. In addition sync_file_range just

Re: [PATCH v6 12/20] fs: add a new fstype flag to indicate how writeback errors are tracked

2017-06-15 Thread Jeff Layton
On Thu, 2017-06-15 at 01:22 -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Wed, Jun 14, 2017 at 01:24:43PM -0400, Jeff Layton wrote: > > In this smaller set, it's only really used for DAX. > > DAX only is implemented by three filesystems, please just fix them > up in one go. > Ok. > > sync_file_range:

Re: [PATCH v6 12/20] fs: add a new fstype flag to indicate how writeback errors are tracked

2017-06-15 Thread Christoph Hellwig
On Wed, Jun 14, 2017 at 01:24:43PM -0400, Jeff Layton wrote: > In this smaller set, it's only really used for DAX. DAX only is implemented by three filesystems, please just fix them up in one go. > sync_file_range: ->fsync isn't called directly there, and I think we > probably want similar

Re: [PATCH v6 12/20] fs: add a new fstype flag to indicate how writeback errors are tracked

2017-06-14 Thread Jeff Layton
On Tue, 2017-06-13 at 23:47 -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 06:24:32AM -0400, Jeff Layton wrote: > > That's definitely what I want for the endgame here. My plan was to add > > this flag for now, and then eventually reverse it (or drop it) once all > > or most filesystems

Re: [PATCH v6 12/20] fs: add a new fstype flag to indicate how writeback errors are tracked

2017-06-14 Thread Christoph Hellwig
On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 06:24:32AM -0400, Jeff Layton wrote: > That's definitely what I want for the endgame here. My plan was to add > this flag for now, and then eventually reverse it (or drop it) once all > or most filesystems are converted. > > We can do it that way from the get-go if you

Re: [PATCH v6 12/20] fs: add a new fstype flag to indicate how writeback errors are tracked

2017-06-13 Thread Jeff Layton
On Mon, 2017-06-12 at 05:45 -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 08:23:06AM -0400, Jeff Layton wrote: > > Add a new FS_WB_ERRSEQ flag to the fstype. Later patches will set and > > key off of that to decide what behavior should be used. > > Please invert this so that only file

Re: [PATCH v6 12/20] fs: add a new fstype flag to indicate how writeback errors are tracked

2017-06-12 Thread Christoph Hellwig
On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 08:23:06AM -0400, Jeff Layton wrote: > Add a new FS_WB_ERRSEQ flag to the fstype. Later patches will set and > key off of that to decide what behavior should be used. Please invert this so that only file systems that keep the old semantics need a flag. -- To unsubscribe

[PATCH v6 12/20] fs: add a new fstype flag to indicate how writeback errors are tracked

2017-06-12 Thread Jeff Layton
Now that we have new infrastructure for handling writeback errors using errseq_t, we need to convert the existing code to use it. We could attempt to retrofit the old interfaces on top of the new, but there is a conceptual disconnect here in the case of internal callers that invoke