From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C4B71C4361B for ; Fri, 18 Dec 2020 20:26:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8B3C123B08 for ; Fri, 18 Dec 2020 20:26:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1730684AbgLRU0D (ORCPT ); Fri, 18 Dec 2020 15:26:03 -0500 Received: from mx2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:56878 "EHLO mx2.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1730516AbgLRU0C (ORCPT ); Fri, 18 Dec 2020 15:26:02 -0500 X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at test-mx.suse.de Received: from relay2.suse.de (unknown [195.135.221.27]) by mx2.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id B7CB0AF5D; Fri, 18 Dec 2020 20:25:20 +0000 (UTC) From: NeilBrown To: Jeffrey Layton , Vivek Goyal Date: Sat, 19 Dec 2020 07:25:12 +1100 Cc: Jeff Layton , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-unionfs@vger.kernel.org, amir73il@gmail.com, sargun@sargun.me, miklos@szeredi.hu, willy@infradead.org, jack@suse.cz, neilb@suse.com, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] overlayfs: Check writeback errors w.r.t upper in ->syncfs() In-Reply-To: <20201218165551.GA1178523@tleilax.poochiereds.net> References: <20201216233149.39025-1-vgoyal@redhat.com> <20201216233149.39025-4-vgoyal@redhat.com> <20201217200856.GA707519@tleilax.poochiereds.net> <20201218144418.GA3424@redhat.com> <20201218150258.GA866424@tleilax.poochiereds.net> <20201218162819.GC3424@redhat.com> <20201218165551.GA1178523@tleilax.poochiereds.net> Message-ID: <87sg82n9p3.fsf@notabene.neil.brown.name> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature" Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-unionfs@vger.kernel.org --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain On Fri, Dec 18 2020, Jeffrey Layton wrote: > > The patch we're discussing here _does_ add a f_op->syncfs, which is why > I was suggesting to do it that way. I haven't thought through the issues to decide what I think of adding a new op, but I already know what I think of adding ->syncfs. Don't Do It. The name is much too easily confused with ->sync_fs. If you call it ->sync_fs_return_error() it would be MUCH better. And having said that, the solution becomes obvious. Add a new flag, either as another bit in 'int wait', or as a new bool. The new flag would be "return_error" - or whatever is appropriate. NeilBrown --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQJBBAEBCAAsFiEEG8Yp69OQ2HB7X0l6Oeye3VZigbkFAl/dECgOHG5laWxiQHN1 c2UuZGUACgkQOeye3VZigbk3ig/4iZJnVRvb8/0pwu2NgBVBzqiie5K8kJNvUzsU BBTsOxBahvwn2B3zMsI9IP3q77wAdVF8wbl8HihIjuGuFramVoMmkCH+t1vVHa35 cHuB+xZEOEqGgSVWYC02Ci54z+ZxHi71JlbVfT3n7Zrj1VY+k9q/23ZzRPknQjTr NU1QA2ya8r1P006F5/hJ/3zLTneuMYJsRWT6AlvYabI+rv12TMcirBBQFhcfb3je Q+/3RPZW1avW+hlIoACeMA0PRxWASwLH04Wx1zrC85G3OSpC+uBFt254jL/R5EPF GBiGPmEaEALoJrlnSoJLBWysb50lyTUf94R/Gj2wqYA3fJ51YB1eZqm2yudaUPWY QfYoaO6KdyjbPOJjXXD2lznIyWKvKFtT1XR/yvuKwuNtnuX2001uhXFLCLGTDFO8 ujbSBJkFlMGGvxfZ2FsqRUBNWgPaKHMUCgIeqiTVmSqPoVeaVn74Ru06ilIVbcTF 1ULHPC7arfCNRTbl7siAaGPSiPGbco4asdgrJzGyFaOJhgmZZ16kC1jFqAwwYMrg 1sfjpjkgyPWjYy+hAbkOMsp3O1s3jvzVc8Qu0YLd0HKEI2zL7b52MzkE2KH4i1WN hYD5QCUc1G1xzEMPwnMCC7Jdthypgzjg6J9TzbmtOlfWQFORuCOTEeHUzcx6Lsf0 e/2rvw== =hNhL -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=--