From: Artem Bityutskiy <dedekind@infradead.org>
To: brijesh.singh@calsoftinc.com
Cc: linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: UBI: io_write_path
Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2007 15:28:58 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1184243338.3531.116.camel@sauron> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <33922.172.16.0.34.1184236297.squirrel@webmail.calsoftinc.com>
Hi,
On Thu, 2007-07-12 at 16:01 +0530, brijesh.singh@calsoftinc.com wrote:
> Hi,
> I walked through eba_write path.I found that,if EBUSY or EAGAIN is
> returned as err code from ubi_io_write_vid_hdr or ubi_io_write_data
> ,still the PEB is put back to wear-levelling.This is
> unnecessary.Shouldn't it retry on same PEB again?
AFAICS if any error except -EIO is returned, we just return it up (see
below)
Probably you are right, -EBUSY and -EAGAIN could be treated differently.
We could put this LEB and try a new one. But we cannot try the same one
I guess, at least it does not sound safe. Who knows, may be something
was written? It is safer to take a new PEB. But yes, it is not
necessarily to torture this LEB in case of -EBUSY and -EAGAIN.
Feel free to send a patch. It would be also nice if you pointed when MTD
could return these errors, because I doubt it is possible in current
implementation. But anyways, handling those gracefully is good.
> Code Snip:
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> retry:
> pnum = ubi_wl_get_peb(ubi, dtype);
> if (pnum < 0) {
> ubi_free_vid_hdr(ubi, vid_hdr);
> leb_write_unlock(ubi, vol_id, lnum);
> return pnum;
> }
>
> err = ubi_io_write_vid_hdr(ubi, pnum, vid_hdr);
> if (err) {
> ubi_warn("failed to write VID header to LEB %d:%d, PEB %d",
> vol_id, lnum, pnum);
> goto write_error;
> }
>
> err = ubi_io_write_data(ubi, buf, pnum, offset, len);
> if (err) {
> ubi_warn("failed to write %d bytes at offset %d of LEB %d:%d, " "PEB
> %d", len, offset, vol_id, lnum, pnum);
> goto write_error;
> }
> ...
>
> write_error:
> if (err != -EIO || !ubi->bad_allowed) {
> ubi_ro_mode(ubi);
> leb_write_unlock(ubi, vol_id, lnum);
> ubi_free_vid_hdr(ubi, vid_hdr);
> return err;
> }
So here we switch to RO mode and return the error up. We could do
better. Like -ENOMEM should not cause switching to RO mode. -EAGAIN and
-EBUSY - similarly.
I bet there are other places where error handling could be smarter. Feel
free to send patches.
--
Best regards,
Artem Bityutskiy (Битюцкий Артём)
prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-07-12 12:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-07-12 10:31 UBI: io_write_path brijesh.singh
2007-07-12 12:28 ` Artem Bityutskiy [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1184243338.3531.116.camel@sauron \
--to=dedekind@infradead.org \
--cc=brijesh.singh@calsoftinc.com \
--cc=linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox