From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list xfs); Mon, 29 Sep 2008 07:34:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda3.sgi.com [192.48.176.15]) by oss.sgi.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11/SuSE Linux 0.7) with ESMTP id m8TEYTOl025795 for ; Mon, 29 Sep 2008 07:34:30 -0700 Received: from sandeen.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cuda.sgi.com (Spam Firewall) with ESMTP id 9932E1B4C306 for ; Mon, 29 Sep 2008 07:36:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sandeen.net (sandeen.net [209.173.210.139]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id DUoqhWz0IIG6Weh9 for ; Mon, 29 Sep 2008 07:36:06 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <48E0E7D4.1090409@sandeen.net> Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2008 09:36:04 -0500 From: Eric Sandeen MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] Add timeout feature References: <20080908205337t-sato@mail.jp.nec.com> <20080908171119.GB22521@infradead.org> <48DBFD42.6030307@redhat.com> <20080929141326.GA31781@infradead.org> In-Reply-To: <20080929141326.GA31781@infradead.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: xfs-bounce@oss.sgi.com Errors-to: xfs-bounce@oss.sgi.com List-Id: xfs To: Christoph Hellwig Cc: Takashi Sato , Ric Wheeler , Andrew Morton , Oleg Nesterov , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, dm-devel@redhat.com, viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, xfs@oss.sgi.com, axboe@kernel.dk, mtk.manpages@googlemail.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 05:52:35PM +0900, Takashi Sato wrote: >> I think that your concern is that the freezer cannot recognize the occurrence >> of a timeout and it continues the backup process and the backup data is >> corrupted finally. > > What timeout should happen? the freeze ioctl must not return until the > filesystem is a clean state and all writes are blocked. The suggestion was that *UN*freeze would return ETIMEDOUT if the filesystem had already unfrozen itself, I think. That way you know that the snapshot you just took is worthless, at least. I'm still not really sold on the timeout, but I think the above was the intent. -Eric