From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andrew Morton Subject: Re: [patch 0/9] writeback data integrity and other fixes (take 3) Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2008 17:05:31 -0700 Message-ID: <20081028170531.9fd7a89d.akpm@linux-foundation.org> References: <20081028144715.683011000@suse.de> <20081028231435.GD4985@disturbed> <20081028235755.GC15599@wotan.suse.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, chris.mason@oracle.com To: Nick Piggin Return-path: Received: from smtp1.linux-foundation.org ([140.211.169.13]:40180 "EHLO smtp1.linux-foundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752860AbYJ2AHB (ORCPT ); Tue, 28 Oct 2008 20:07:01 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20081028235755.GC15599@wotan.suse.de> Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Wed, 29 Oct 2008 00:57:55 +0100 Nick Piggin wrote: > On Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 10:14:35AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 01:47:15AM +1100, npiggin@suse.de wrote: > > > OK, I'm happier with this patchset now. Note that I've taken your patch > > > and mangled it a bit at the end of the series. > > > > > > This one survives and seems to run OK here, but I'm mainly doing dumb > > > stress testing with a handful of filesystems, and data-io error injection > > > testing. There are a lot of combinations of ways this function can operate > > > and interact obviously, so it would be helpful to get more review. > > > > > > Chris, would you possibly have time to run your btrfs tests that are > > > sensitive to problems in this code? I could provide you a single patch > > > rollup against mainline if it helps. > > > > Nick, after applying the patchset: > > > > CC mm/page-writeback.o > > mm/page-writeback.c: In function write_cache_pages: > > mm/page-writeback.c:871: warning: wrteback_index may be used uninitialized in this function > > > > Looks harmless, but it probably should be cleaned up. > > Compiler is 'gcc version 4.3.1 (Debian 4.3.1-9)' > > Yeah, it's annoying but I couldn't find a way to shut it up nicely > (yes AFAIKS it is harmless). > > I could just put the old "= 0; /* shut up gcc*/" trick there, but that > sucks too ;( > uninitialized_var()?