From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "J. R. Okajima" Subject: Re: [PATCH] dcache: return -ESTALE not -EBUSY on distributed fs race Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2014 01:27:14 +0900 Message-ID: <13170.1418920034@jrobl> References: <20141217195911.GF9617@fieldses.org> <20141217200153.GG9617@fieldses.org> <12689.1418917838@jrobl> <20141218155838.GD18179@fieldses.org> Cc: Al Viro , linux-nfs-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-fsdevel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, Jeff Layton To: "J. Bruce Fields" Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20141218155838.GD18179-uC3wQj2KruNg9hUCZPvPmw@public.gmane.org> Sender: linux-nfs-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org "J. Bruce Fields": > Why do you think -EBUSY's the right error in the local filesystem case? This busy_or_stale() is another bandaid, based upon your patch, EBUSY --> ESTALE. Because the msg string of ESTALE is "Stale NFS file handle" on many systems, I don't think it a good idea to return it for local fs. If you think EIO is better than EBUSY you can change it to eio_or_stale(). If you think it is surely not happen on every local fs, then this inline function is not necessary. J. R. Okajima -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html