From: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com>
To: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-unionfs@vger.kernel.org, jlayton@kernel.org,
amir73il@gmail.com, sargun@sargun.me, miklos@szeredi.hu,
willy@infradead.org, jack@suse.cz, neilb@suse.com,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] vfs: add new f_op->syncfs vector
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2020 10:00:29 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20201217150029.GA3630@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20201217004935.GN3579531@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 12:49:35AM +0000, Al Viro wrote:
> [Christoph added to Cc...]
> On Wed, Dec 16, 2020 at 06:31:47PM -0500, Vivek Goyal wrote:
> > Current implementation of __sync_filesystem() ignores the return code
> > from ->sync_fs(). I am not sure why that's the case. There must have
> > been some historical reason for this.
> >
> > 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).
> >
> > If we modify existing implementation, there is a concern that it will
> > lead to user space visible behavior changes and break things. So
> > instead implement a new file_operations->syncfs() call which will
> > be called in syncfs() syscall path. Return code from this new
> > call will be captured. And all the writeback error detection
> > logic can go in there as well. Only filesystems which implement
> > this call get affected by this change. Others continue to fallback
> > to existing mechanism.
>
> That smells like a massive source of confusion down the road. I'd just
> looked through the existing instances; many always return 0, but quite
> a few sometimes try to return an error:
> fs/btrfs/super.c:2412: .sync_fs = btrfs_sync_fs,
> fs/exfat/super.c:204: .sync_fs = exfat_sync_fs,
> fs/ext4/super.c:1674: .sync_fs = ext4_sync_fs,
> fs/f2fs/super.c:2480: .sync_fs = f2fs_sync_fs,
> fs/gfs2/super.c:1600: .sync_fs = gfs2_sync_fs,
> fs/hfsplus/super.c:368: .sync_fs = hfsplus_sync_fs,
> fs/nilfs2/super.c:689: .sync_fs = nilfs_sync_fs,
> fs/ocfs2/super.c:139: .sync_fs = ocfs2_sync_fs,
> fs/overlayfs/super.c:399: .sync_fs = ovl_sync_fs,
> fs/ubifs/super.c:2052: .sync_fs = ubifs_sync_fs,
> is the list of such. There are 4 method callers:
> dquot_quota_sync(), dquot_disable(), __sync_filesystem() and
> sync_fs_one_sb(). For sync_fs_one_sb() we want to ignore the
> return value; for __sync_filesystem() we almost certainly
> do *not* - it ends with return __sync_blockdev(sb->s_bdev, wait),
> after all. The question for that one is whether we want
> __sync_blockdev() called even in case of ->sync_fs() reporting
> a failure, and I suspect that it's safer to call it anyway and
> return the first error value we'd got.
I posted V1 patch to do exactly above. In __sync_filesystem(), capture
return code from ->sync_fs() but continue to call __sync_blockdev() and
and return error code from ->sync_fs() if there is one otherwise
return error code from __sync_blockdev().
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-fsdevel/20201216143802.GA10550@redhat.com/
Thanks
Vivek
> No idea about quota situation.
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-12-17 15:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-12-16 23:31 [RFC PATCH 0/3] vfs, overlayfs: Fix syncfs() to return error Vivek Goyal
2020-12-16 23:31 ` [PATCH 1/3] vfs: add new f_op->syncfs vector Vivek Goyal
2020-12-17 0:49 ` Al Viro
2020-12-17 9:57 ` Jan Kara
2020-12-17 16:15 ` Vivek Goyal
2020-12-17 15:00 ` Vivek Goyal [this message]
2020-12-17 19:49 ` Jeff Layton
2020-12-16 23:31 ` [PATCH 2/3] overlayfs: Implement f_op->syncfs() call Vivek Goyal
2020-12-16 23:31 ` [PATCH 3/3] overlayfs: Check writeback errors w.r.t upper in ->syncfs() Vivek Goyal
2020-12-17 20:08 ` Jeffrey Layton
2020-12-18 14:44 ` Vivek Goyal
2020-12-18 15:02 ` Jeff Layton
2020-12-18 16:28 ` Vivek Goyal
2020-12-18 16:55 ` Jeffrey Layton
2020-12-18 20:25 ` NeilBrown
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=20201217150029.GA3630@redhat.com \
--to=vgoyal@redhat.com \
--cc=amir73il@gmail.com \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--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=neilb@suse.com \
--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).