From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ted Ts'o Subject: Re: [PATCH] jbd2: Make barrier messages less scary Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2010 09:58:23 -0400 Message-ID: <20100727135823.GG18966@thunk.org> References: <4C4DE515.5020307@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: ext4 development To: Eric Sandeen Return-path: Received: from THUNK.ORG ([69.25.196.29]:56885 "EHLO thunker.thunk.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751811Ab0G0N6T (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Jul 2010 09:58:19 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4C4DE515.5020307@redhat.com> Sender: linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Mon, Jul 26, 2010 at 02:42:13PM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote: > Saying things like "sync failed" when a device does > not support barriers makes users slightly more worried than > they need to be; rather than talking about sync failures, > let's just state the barrier-based facts. > > Signed-off-by: Eric Sandeen > --- > > diff --git a/fs/jbd2/commit.c b/fs/jbd2/commit.c > index 75716d3..3d15b28 100644 > --- a/fs/jbd2/commit.c > +++ b/fs/jbd2/commit.c > @@ -150,8 +150,8 @@ static int journal_submit_commit_record(journal_t *journal, > */ > if (ret == -EOPNOTSUPP && barrier_done) { > printk(KERN_WARNING > - "JBD: barrier-based sync failed on %s - " > - "disabling barriers\n", journal->j_devname); > + "JBD2: Disabling barriers on %s, " > + "not supported by device\n", journal->j_devname); > spin_lock(&journal->j_state_lock); > journal->j_flags &= ~JBD2_BARRIER; > spin_unlock(&journal->j_state_lock); > @@ -180,8 +180,8 @@ retry: > wait_on_buffer(bh); > if (buffer_eopnotsupp(bh) && (journal->j_flags & JBD2_BARRIER)) { > printk(KERN_WARNING > - "JBD2: wait_on_commit_record: sync failed on %s - " > - "disabling barriers\n", journal->j_devname); > + "JBD2: %s: barriers no longer supported on %s - " > + "disabling barriers\n", __func__, journal->j_devname); Any reason this message has "no longer supported" as opposed to the "not supported by device" printed above? - Ted