From: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com>
To: Linux fsdevel mailing list <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-unionfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, miklos@szeredi.hu, jlayton@kernel.org,
amir73il@gmail.com, willy@infradead.org, jack@suse.cz,
sargun@sargun.me
Subject: [PATCH] vfs, syncfs: Do not ignore return code from ->sync_fs()
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2020 09:38:02 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20201216143802.GA10550@redhat.com> (raw)
I see that current implementation of __sync_filesystem() ignores the
return code from ->sync_fs(). I am not sure why that's the case.
Ignoring ->sync_fs() return code is problematic for overlayfs where
it can return error if sync_filesystem() on upper super block failed.
That error will simply be lost and sycnfs(overlay_fd), will get
success (despite the fact it failed).
I am assuming that we want to continue to call __sync_blockdev()
despite the fact that there have been errors reported from
->sync_fs(). So I wrote this simple patch which captures the
error from ->sync_fs() but continues to call __sync_blockdev()
and returns error from sync_fs() if there is one.
There might be some very good reasons to not capture ->sync_fs()
return code, I don't know. Hence thought of proposing this patch.
Atleast I will get to know the reason. I still need to figure
a way out how to propagate overlay sync_fs() errors to user
space.
Signed-off-by: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com>
---
fs/sync.c | 8 ++++++--
1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
Index: redhat-linux/fs/sync.c
===================================================================
--- redhat-linux.orig/fs/sync.c 2020-12-16 09:15:49.831565653 -0500
+++ redhat-linux/fs/sync.c 2020-12-16 09:23:42.499853207 -0500
@@ -30,14 +30,18 @@
*/
static int __sync_filesystem(struct super_block *sb, int wait)
{
+ int ret, ret2;
+
if (wait)
sync_inodes_sb(sb);
else
writeback_inodes_sb(sb, WB_REASON_SYNC);
if (sb->s_op->sync_fs)
- sb->s_op->sync_fs(sb, wait);
- return __sync_blockdev(sb->s_bdev, wait);
+ ret = sb->s_op->sync_fs(sb, wait);
+ ret2 = __sync_blockdev(sb->s_bdev, wait);
+
+ return ret ? ret : ret2;
}
/*
next reply other threads:[~2020-12-16 14:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-12-16 14:38 Vivek Goyal [this message]
2020-12-16 14:57 ` [PATCH] vfs, syncfs: Do not ignore return code from ->sync_fs() Jeff Layton
2020-12-16 15:14 ` Vivek Goyal
2020-12-16 15:44 ` Jeff Layton
2020-12-16 15:53 ` Jeff Layton
2020-12-16 17:16 ` Vivek Goyal
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20201216143802.GA10550@redhat.com \
--to=vgoyal@redhat.com \
--cc=amir73il@gmail.com \
--cc=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=jlayton@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-unionfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=miklos@szeredi.hu \
--cc=sargun@sargun.me \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
--cc=willy@infradead.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).