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=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED 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 5F80EC433E0 for ; Tue, 19 May 2020 19:31:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3A5002070A for ; Tue, 19 May 2020 19:31:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726344AbgESTbr (ORCPT ); Tue, 19 May 2020 15:31:47 -0400 Received: from outgoing-auth-1.mit.edu ([18.9.28.11]:45901 "EHLO outgoing.mit.edu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726059AbgESTbr (ORCPT ); Tue, 19 May 2020 15:31:47 -0400 Received: from callcc.thunk.org (pool-100-0-195-244.bstnma.fios.verizon.net [100.0.195.244]) (authenticated bits=0) (User authenticated as tytso@ATHENA.MIT.EDU) by outgoing.mit.edu (8.14.7/8.12.4) with ESMTP id 04JJVfG0008218 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 19 May 2020 15:31:42 -0400 Received: by callcc.thunk.org (Postfix, from userid 15806) id B9BA5420304; Tue, 19 May 2020 15:31:41 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 19 May 2020 15:31:41 -0400 From: "Theodore Y. Ts'o" To: Harshad Shirwadkar Cc: linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, Jan Kara Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] ext4: don't ignore return values from ext4_ext_dirty() Message-ID: <20200519193141.GG2396055@mit.edu> References: <20200427013438.219117-1-harshadshirwadkar@gmail.com> <20200427013438.219117-2-harshadshirwadkar@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20200427013438.219117-2-harshadshirwadkar@gmail.com> Sender: linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org On Sun, Apr 26, 2020 at 06:34:38PM -0700, Harshad Shirwadkar wrote: > Don't ignore return values from ext4_ext_dirty, since the errors > indicate valid failures below Ext4. In all of the other instances of > ext4_ext_dirty calls, the error return value is handled in some > way. This patch makes those remaining couple of places to handle > ext4_ext_dirty errors as well. In case of ext4_split_extent_at(), the > ignorance of return value is intentional. The reason is that we are > already in error path and there isn't much we can do if ext4_ext_dirty > returns error. This patch adds a comment for that case explaining why > we ignore the return value. > > In the longer run, we probably should > make sure that errors from other mark_dirty routines are handled as > well. > > Ran gce-xfstests smoke tests and verified that there were no > regressions. > > Signed-off-by: Harshad Shirwadkar > Reviewed-by: Jan Kara Thanks, applied. - Ted