From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Erik Mouw Subject: Re: [RFC] PATCH to fix rescan_partitions to return errors properly - take 2 Date: Fri, 6 Oct 2006 23:07:22 +0200 Message-ID: <20061006210721.GC31233@harddisk-recovery.nl> References: <452307B4.3050006@in.ibm.com> <20061004130932.GC18800@harddisk-recovery.com> <4523E66B.5090604@in.ibm.com> <20061004170827.GE18800@harddisk-recovery.nl> <4523F16D.5060808@in.ibm.com> <20061005104018.GC7343@harddisk-recovery.nl> <45256BE2.5040702@in.ibm.com> <20061006125336.GA27183@harddisk-recovery.nl> <452695CE.8080901@in.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: lkml , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, Andrew Morton , andmike@us.ibm.com Return-path: Received: from dtp.xs4all.nl ([80.126.206.180]:47864 "HELO abra2.bitwizard.nl") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S932629AbWJFVHY (ORCPT ); Fri, 6 Oct 2006 17:07:24 -0400 To: Suzuki K P Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <452695CE.8080901@in.ibm.com> Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org On Fri, Oct 06, 2006 at 10:43:42AM -0700, Suzuki K P wrote: > Erik Mouw wrote: > >I think it's best not to change the current behaviour and let all > >partition checkers run, even if one of them failed due to device > >errors. I wouldn't mind if the behaviour changed like you propose, > >though. > > > At present, the partition checkers doesn't run, if one of the preceeding > checker has reported an error ! *But*, some of the checkers doesn't > report the I/O error which they came across! So, this may let others > run. Thats not we want, right. We would like them to return I/O errors, > and and the check_partition should let other partition checkers continue. Indeed, we want them to behave the same. I.e.: a partition checker should tell when it encounters an I/O error. Erik -- +-- Erik Mouw -- www.harddisk-recovery.nl -- +31 70 370 12 90 -- | Lab address: Delftechpark 26, 2628 XH, Delft, The Netherlands