From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752323AbcL2Cy0 convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Wed, 28 Dec 2016 21:54:26 -0500 Received: from prv-mh.provo.novell.com ([137.65.248.74]:59111 "EHLO prv-mh.provo.novell.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752283AbcL2CyY (ORCPT ); Wed, 28 Dec 2016 21:54:24 -0500 Message-Id: <5864EB5A020000F90005CFF8@prv-mh.provo.novell.com> X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise Internet Agent 14.2.1 Date: Wed, 28 Dec 2016 19:54:18 -0700 From: "Gang He" To: Cc: , , , Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/4] ocfs2: fix some small problems References: <1482308461-12964-1-git-send-email-ghe@suse.com> <1482308461-12964-3-git-send-email-ghe@suse.com> In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Content-Disposition: inline Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org >>> > Hi Gang, one small comment below: > > On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 2:20 AM, Gang He wrote: >> First, move setting fe_done = 1 in spin lock, avoid bring >> any potential race condition. Second, tune mlog message level >> from ERROR to NOTICE, since the message should not belong to >> error message. >> >> Signed-off-by: Gang He >> --- >> fs/ocfs2/filecheck.c | 8 ++++---- >> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) >> >> @@ -545,11 +545,11 @@ static ssize_t ocfs2_filecheck_store(struct kobject > *kobj, >> spin_lock(&ent->fs_fcheck->fc_lock); >> if ((ent->fs_fcheck->fc_size >= ent->fs_fcheck->fc_max) && >> (ent->fs_fcheck->fc_done == 0)) { >> - mlog(ML_ERROR, >> + mlog(ML_NOTICE, >> "Cannot do more file check " >> "since file check queue(%u) is full now\n", >> ent->fs_fcheck->fc_max); >> - ret = -EBUSY; >> + ret = -EAGAIN; > > This change wasn't described in the patch header. Granted, from the > message above the change, -EAGAIN certainly seems a more reasonable > return value but it would be good to know whether this was intended > and why. Hello Mark, thank for your comments, I will add the description for this change in V3. Do you have any other comments for the other patches in v2? Thanks Gang > > Thanks, > --Mark