[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAJDTihyhA7Q_O=DhdPxLquReY1CO=3y3XgZtZ5pA5kY+DTAvMg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 4 Sep 2018 18:45:54 +0800
From: 焦晓冬 <milestonejxd@...il.com>
To: R.E.Wolff@...wizard.nl
Cc: jlayton@...hat.com, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: POSIX violation by writeback error
On Tue, Sep 4, 2018 at 5:29 PM Rogier Wolff <R.E.Wolff@...wizard.nl> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Sep 04, 2018 at 04:58:59PM +0800, 焦晓冬 wrote:
>
> > As for suggestion, maybe the error flag of inode/mapping, or the entire inode
> > should not be evicted if there was an error. That hopefully won't take much
> > memory. On extreme conditions, where too much error inode requires staying
> > in memory, maybe we should panic rather then spread the error.
>
> Again you are hoping it will fit in memory. In an extreme case it
> won't fit in memory. Tyring to come up with heuristics about when to
> remember and when to forget such things from the past is very
> difficult.
The key point is to report errors, not to hide it from user space to
prevent further errors/damage,
and that is also what POSIX wants.
And, storing inode/mapping/error_flag in memory is quite different
from storing the data itself.
They are tiny and only increase per inode rather than per error page.
>
> Think of my comments as: "it's harder than you think", not as "can't
> be done".
>
> Roger.
>
> --
> ** R.E.Wolff@...Wizard.nl ** http://www.BitWizard.nl/ ** +31-15-2600998 **
> ** Delftechpark 26 2628 XH Delft, The Netherlands. KVK: 27239233 **
> *-- BitWizard writes Linux device drivers for any device you may have! --*
> The plan was simple, like my brother-in-law Phil. But unlike
> Phil, this plan just might work.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists