From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Matthew Wilcox Subject: Re: Wrong DIF guard tag on ext2 write Date: Tue, 1 Jun 2010 10:29:30 -0600 Message-ID: <20100601162929.GC32708@parisc-linux.org> References: <20100531112817.GA16260@schmichrtp.mainz.de.ibm.com> <1275318102.2823.47.camel@mulgrave.site> <4C03D5FD.3000202@panasas.com> <20100601103041.GA15922@schmichrtp.mainz.de.ibm.com> <1275398876.21962.6.camel@mulgrave.site> <20100601133341.GK8980@think> <1275399637.21962.11.camel@mulgrave.site> <20100601134951.GM8980@think> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii To: Chris Mason , James Bottomley , Christof Schmitt , Boaz Harrosh , "Martin K. Peter Return-path: Received: from palinux.external.hp.com ([192.25.206.14]:55510 "EHLO mail.parisc-linux.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750748Ab0FAQ3b (ORCPT ); Tue, 1 Jun 2010 12:29:31 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20100601134951.GM8980@think> Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Tue, Jun 01, 2010 at 09:49:51AM -0400, Chris Mason wrote: > > I agree that a block based retry would close all the holes ... it just > > doesn't look elegant to me that the fs will already be repeating the I/O > > if it changed the page and so will block. > > We might not ever repeat the IO. We might change the page, write it, > change it again, truncate the file and toss the page completely. Why does it matter that it was never written in that case? -- Matthew Wilcox Intel Open Source Technology Centre "Bill, look, we understand that you're interested in selling us this operating system, but compare it to ours. We can't possibly take such a retrograde step."