From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754215Ab2GBOfg (ORCPT ); Mon, 2 Jul 2012 10:35:36 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:44147 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751028Ab2GBOff (ORCPT ); Mon, 2 Jul 2012 10:35:35 -0400 Date: Mon, 2 Jul 2012 10:35:16 -0400 From: Mike Snitzer To: Joel Becker Cc: Christoph Hellwig , axboe@kernel.dk, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, tj@kernel.org, jmoyer@redhat.com, vgoyal@redhat.com, dm-devel@redhat.com Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] block: all callers should check blkdev_issue_flush's return Message-ID: <20120702143515.GD785@redhat.com> References: <1340724445-3314-1-git-send-email-snitzer@redhat.com> <20120626155115.GA17242@infradead.org> <20120626155750.GA3494@redhat.com> <20120701072836.GA13247@dhcp-172-17-9-228.mtv.corp.google.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20120701072836.GA13247@dhcp-172-17-9-228.mtv.corp.google.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sun, Jul 01 2012 at 3:28am -0400, Joel Becker wrote: > On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 11:57:50AM -0400, Mike Snitzer wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 26 2012 at 11:51am -0400, > > Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > > > > On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 11:27:25AM -0400, Mike Snitzer wrote: > > > > It is concerning that a FLUSH may fail but the blkdev_issue_flush > > > > callers assume it will always succeed. > > > > > > > > Each blkdev_issue_flush caller should come to terms with the reality > > > > that a FLUSH may fail -- the file_operations' .fsync methods in > > > > particular. nilfs2 is the only filesystem that checks > > > > blkdev_issue_flush's return. > > > > > > Good spot, but it would be way better if you actually provided patches > > > to fix this instead of just adding more compiler warnings. > > > > Alasdair pointed this issue out in response to me asserting that > > blkdev_issue_flush does return non-void. But anyway, others knowing > > about this issue is half the battle. ;) > > > > Most .fsync methods are straight-forward to convert but I'd prefer each > > filesystem maintainer actively audit all blkdev_issue_flush calls. > > So send it out with maintainers on cc: and get Acks. That way we have a > coherent patch series cleaning up the in-tree filesystems, rather than a > bunch of warnings for every compile until the maintainers notice. Hi Joel, I shouldn't have sent an RFC patch at all; a normal mail would've sufficed. My intent wasn't to have that patch go upstream. I explained as much to Jens when I saw him last week: I just wanted to get the issue on filesystem developers' radar (hence the RFC). But just because someone reports something doesn't implicitly mean they own fixing it -- I'm unfortunately quite busy with other work. Given you have more filesystem experience and may be more inclined to pick over the nuance of each blkdev_issue_flush caller (and how short-circuiting on blkdev_issue_flush failure should be handled): please feel free to get a coherent patchset going. ;)