Re: [PATCH 3/4] fsfreeze: manage kill signal when sb_start_pagefault is called

[Marco Stornelli <marco.stornelli@gmail.com>]

Il 06/04/2013 15:20, Matthew Wilcox ha scritto:
> On Sat, Apr 06, 2013 at 12:05:52PM +0200, Marco Stornelli wrote:
>> In every place where sb_start_pagefault was called now we must manage
>> the error code and return VM_FAULT_RETRY.
>
> Erm ... in patch 1/4:
>
>   static inline void sb_start_pagefault(struct super_block *sb)
>   {
> -       __sb_start_write(sb, SB_FREEZE_PAGEFAULT, true);
> +       __sb_start_write_wait(sb, SB_FREEZE_PAGEFAULT, false);
>   }
>
>>
>> -	sb_start_pagefault(inode->i_sb);
>> +	ret = sb_start_pagefault(inode->i_sb);
>> +	if (ret)
>> +		return VM_FAULT_RETRY;
>>   	ret  = btrfs_delalloc_reserve_space(inode, PAGE_CACHE_SIZE);
>
> Does the compiler not warn that you're assigning void to 'ret'?  Or was
> there some other SNAFU sending these patches?
>

I'm sorry, my fault :) As I said in 00 these patches are completely 
*not* tested, it was only a "quick coding & review" to understand if 
someone can see any problem to this kind of implementation, since I 
touched several points in the kernel. So there is still on-going work 
and I need to do several tests. Maybe I had to add the RFC tag, sorry again.

Marco

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>