From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([198.137.202.9]:50332 "EHLO bombadil.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S965350AbdAILID (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 Jan 2017 06:08:03 -0500 Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2017 03:08:03 -0800 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [PATCH] xfs: don't print warnings when xfs_log_force fails Message-ID: <20170109110803.GA27554@infradead.org> References: <1482999799-11776-1-git-send-email-hch@lst.de> <1482999799-11776-2-git-send-email-hch@lst.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1482999799-11776-2-git-send-email-hch@lst.de> Sender: linux-xfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: List-Id: xfs To: darrick.wong@oracle.com Cc: linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Dec 29, 2016 at 09:23:19AM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > There are only two reasons for xfs_log_force / xfs_log_force_lsn to fail: > one is an I/O error, for which xlog_bdstrat already logs a warning, and > the second is an already shutdown log due to a previous I/O errors. In > the latter case we'll already have a previous indication for the actual > error, but the large stream of misleading warnings from xfs_log_force > will probably scroll it out of the message buffer. > > Simply removing the warnings thus makes the XFS log reporting significantly > better. Darrick, any opinion on this one? I was hoping to sneak it into 4.10-rc still..