From: Amir Goldstein <amir73il@gmail.com>
To: "Ted Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>
Cc: Bernd Schubert <bs_lists@aakef.fastmail.fm>,
linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, Bernd Schubert <bschubert@ddn.com>
Subject: Re: ext4_clear_journal_err: Filesystem error recorded from previous mount: IO failure
Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2010 10:50:13 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <AANLkTim94HAvxTgvhdhmJ6oPR0YpaPT97TEXq8ZCfTPU@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20101023221714.GB24650@thunk.org>
On Sun, Oct 24, 2010 at 12:17 AM, Ted Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu> wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 23, 2010 at 06:00:05PM +0200, Amir Goldstein wrote:
>>
>> IMHO, and I've said it before, the mount flag which Bernd requests
>> already exists, namely 'errors=', both as mount option and as
>> persistent default, but it is not enforced correctly on mount time.
>> If an administrator decides that the correct behavior when error is
>> detected is abort or remount-ro, what's the sense it letting the
>> filesystem mount read-write without fixing the problem?
>
> Again, consider the case of the root filesystem containing an error.
> When the error is first discovered during the source of the system's
> operation, and it's set to errors=panic, you want to immediately
> reboot the system. But then, when root file system is mounted, it
> would be bad to have the system immediately panic again. Instead,
> what you want to have happen is to allow e2fsck to run, correct the
> file system errors, and then system can go back to normal operation.
>
> So the current behavior was deliberately designed to be the way that
> it is, and the difference is between "what do you do when you come
> across a file system error", which is what the errors= mount option is
> all about, and "this file system has some kind of error associated
> with it". Just because it has an error associated with it does not
> mean that immediately rebooting is the right thing to do, even if the
> file system is set to "errors=panic". In fact, in the case of a root
> file system, it is manifestly the wrong thing to do. If we did what
> you suggested, then the system would be trapped in a reboot loop
> forever.
>
Yes, I do realize that to panic on mount would be stupid :-)
this is why I wrote that there is no sense in mounting the file system
read-write.
let me rephrase the 3 error behaviors as the designer (you?) intended:
errors=continue - "always stay out of my way and let me corrupt my
file system as much as I want".
errors=read-only - "never let me corrupt my file system more than it
already is".
errors=panic - "never let me corrupt my file system ... and never let
me view files which may not be there after I reboot".
If you agree with my interpretations to the errors behavior codes,
than you should agree to enforcing on mount time:
errors=continue - if ERROR_FS, go a head and corrupt your file system
errors=read-only - if ERROR_FS, allow only read-only mount
errors=panic - if ERROR_FS, allow only read-only mount (files you see
now are safely stored on disk)
Amir.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-10-24 8:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-10-22 13:33 ext4_clear_journal_err: Filesystem error recorded from previous mount: IO failure Bernd Schubert
2010-10-22 17:25 ` Ted Ts'o
2010-10-22 17:42 ` Bernd Schubert
2010-10-22 18:32 ` Ted Ts'o
2010-10-22 18:54 ` Bernd Schubert
2010-10-23 16:00 ` Amir Goldstein
2010-10-23 17:46 ` Bernd Schubert
2010-10-23 22:26 ` Ted Ts'o
2010-10-23 23:56 ` Bernd Schubert
2010-10-24 0:20 ` Bernd Schubert
2010-10-24 1:08 ` Ted Ts'o
2010-10-24 14:42 ` Bernd Schubert
2010-10-23 22:17 ` Ted Ts'o
2010-10-24 8:50 ` Amir Goldstein [this message]
2010-10-24 13:55 ` Ric Wheeler
2010-10-24 14:30 ` Bernd Schubert
2010-10-24 15:20 ` Ric Wheeler
2010-10-24 15:39 ` Bernd Schubert
2010-10-24 15:49 ` Ric Wheeler
2010-10-24 16:16 ` Bernd Schubert
2010-10-24 16:43 ` Ric Wheeler
2010-10-25 10:14 ` Andreas Dilger
2010-10-25 11:45 ` Ric Wheeler
2010-10-25 12:54 ` Ric Wheeler
2010-10-25 14:57 ` Andreas Dilger
2010-10-25 19:49 ` Ric Wheeler
2010-10-25 20:08 ` Bernd Schubert
2010-10-25 20:10 ` Ric Wheeler
2010-10-25 19:43 ` Eric Sandeen
2010-10-25 20:37 ` Bernd Schubert
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=AANLkTim94HAvxTgvhdhmJ6oPR0YpaPT97TEXq8ZCfTPU@mail.gmail.com \
--to=amir73il@gmail.com \
--cc=bs_lists@aakef.fastmail.fm \
--cc=bschubert@ddn.com \
--cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tytso@mit.edu \
/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).