[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2008 09:50:31 +0200
From: "Pekka Enberg" <penberg@...helsinki.fi>
To: "Ryusuke Konishi" <konishi.ryusuke@....ntt.co.jp>
Cc: "Andrew Morton" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH mmotm 3/5] nilfs2: avoid double error caused by nilfs_transaction_end
Hi Ryusuke,
On Fri, Dec 12, 2008 at 7:16 AM, Ryusuke Konishi
<konishi.ryusuke@....ntt.co.jp> wrote:
> Pekka Enberg pointed out that double error handlings found after
> nilfs_transaction_end() can be avoided by separating abort operation:
>
> OK, I don't understand this. The only way nilfs_transaction_end() can
> fail is if we have NILFS_TI_SYNC set and we fail to construct the
> segment. But why do we want to construct a segment if we don't commit?
>
> I guess what I'm asking is why don't we have a separate
> nilfs_transaction_abort() function that can't fail for the erroneous
> case to avoid this double error value tracking thing?
>
> This does the separation and renames nilfs_transaction_end() to
> nilfs_transaction_commit() for clarification.
>
> Since, some calls of these functions were used just for exclusion
> control against the segment constructor, they are replaced with
> semaphore operations.
>
> Cc: Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>
> Signed-off-by: Ryusuke Konishi <konishi.ryusuke@....ntt.co.jp>
Nice cleanup!
Acked-by: Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists