From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753848Ab1LAMee (ORCPT ); Thu, 1 Dec 2011 07:34:34 -0500 Received: from mga03.intel.com ([143.182.124.21]:34673 "EHLO mga03.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753749Ab1LAMed (ORCPT ); Thu, 1 Dec 2011 07:34:33 -0500 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.71,277,1320652800"; d="scan'208";a="81060637" Date: Thu, 1 Dec 2011 20:24:25 +0800 From: Wu Fengguang To: Jan Kara Cc: LKML , "linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org" , Andrew Morton , Linus Torvalds , "Theodore Ts'o" , Matthew Wilcox , Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [PATCH] fs: Make write(2) interruptible by a fatal signal Message-ID: <20111201122425.GA16274@localhost> References: <1322735278-17420-1-git-send-email-jack@suse.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1322735278-17420-1-git-send-email-jack@suse.cz> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi, How are we going to do with this patch? > This patch makes write interruptible by SIGKILL. Let me try to summarize the objective impacts of (not) merging this patch, and would like to hear more opinions from experienced users. - w/o patch BEHAVIOR: write(2) insists to complete even when the user really wants to stop it. IMPACT: It could be annoying to experience slow responses to "kill -9" when it's a large write to a slow device, for example, dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/nokia/zero bs=100M - w/ patch BEHAVIOR: write(2) aborts quickly with possible partial write on SIGKILL IMPACT: The partial write might lead to data corruption somewhere, sometime (the possibility is low but real) and bring trouble to some users. Thanks, Fengguang