[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20120423190622.GA1175@us.ibm.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2012 14:06:22 -0500
From: Malahal Naineni <malahal@...ibm.com>
To: Steve Dickson <SteveD@...hat.com>
Cc: Jeff Layton <jlayton@...hat.com>, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
miklos@...redi.hu, viro@...IV.linux.org.uk, hch@...radead.org,
michael.brantley@...haw.com, sven.breuner@...m.fraunhofer.de,
chuck.lever@...cle.com, pstaubach@...grid.com,
bfields@...ldses.org, trond.myklebust@....uio.no, rees@...ch.edu
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC v3] vfs: make fstatat retry once on ESTALE errors
from getattr call
Steve Dickson [SteveD@...hat.com] wrote:
> > Returning ESTALERETRY would be registering for it in a way and it is
> > somewhat cleaner than having to go all the way back up to the fstype to
> > figure out whether you want to retry it or not.
> How would legacy apps handle this new errno, esp if they have logic
> to take care of ESTALE errors?
>
> steved.
As I understand, there is no new errno for the apps. This new
ESTALERETRY is produced and consumed by kernel only.
--
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