[lkml]   [2005]   [Oct]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [PATCH] Use of getblk differs between locations
    On Tue, Oct 11, 2005 at 01:16:59AM +0200, Mikulas Patocka wrote:
    > On Mon, 10 Oct 2005, Glauber de Oliveira Costa wrote:
    > >
    > >>What should a filesystem driver do if it can't suddenly read or write any
    > >>blocks on media?
    > >
    > >Maybe stopping gracefully, warn about what happened, and let the system
    > >keep going. You may be right about your main filesystem, but in the case
    > >I'm running, for example, my system in an ext3 filesystem, and have a
    > >vfat from a usb key. Should my system really hang because I'm not able
    > >to read/write to the device?
    > getblk won't fail because of I/O error --- it can fail only because of
    > memory management bugs. I think it's right to stop the system in that case
    > --- it's better than silently corrupting data on any device.
    > Mikulas
    In the code, we see:

    if (unlikely(size & (bdev_hardsect_size(bdev)-1) ||
    (size < 512 || size > PAGE_SIZE))) {

    This is where __getblk_slow, and thus, __getblk fails, and it does not
    seem to be due to any memory management bug.

    Glauber de Oliveira Costa
    IBM Linux Technology Center - Brazil
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-10-11 01:26    [W:0.020 / U:3.484 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site