From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ted Ts'o Subject: Re: [PULL REQUEST] ext3, jbd, ext2, and quota fixes for 3.1-rc1 Date: Tue, 26 Jul 2011 20:31:08 -0400 Message-ID: <20110727003108.GA19851@thunk.org> References: <20110726181418.GA27993@quack.suse.cz> <20110726185220.GJ22133@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> <20110726185920.GA2970@infradead.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Cc: Christoph Hellwig , Al Viro , Jan Kara , Josef Bacik , LKML , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org To: Linus Torvalds Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 12:14:28PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 11:59 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > > > In addition to beeing bogus the code also is useless. =A0fsync on a= file > > explicitly does not guarantee anything at all about the parent, and > > never really has on Linux either. >=20 > Well, it may never have done that, but it might still be a case of > quality-of-implementation. >=20 > The data blocks and inode indirect blocks being stable on disk doesn'= t > help hugely if you cannnot actually reach the inode itself. Yeah, that's why it was done. Frank found that with power-fail testing, a large number of files that were freshly created and then fsync()'ed would disappear. If the data is supposed to be available after a power failure, then you have to be able to get to it somehow. I agree what's there isn't safe, and needs to be fixed. I'll deal with it. - Ted