[lkml]   [2012]   [Jan]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [git pull] vfs pile 1
On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 02:12:36PM +0100, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> > Yes. a) really isn't an option - we don't want to spew thousands of
> > useless messages during a log recovery for an operation that's totally
> > normal. b) is okay, too - but it's not just xfs that needs to be
> > covered, but any fs that support the concept of recovering from open
> > but unlinked inodes after a crash. It's just that no one else seems
> > to have regular QA for that code path.
> Since it's a ratelimited printk there won't be thousands of messages. I
> think this is just a cosmetic issue and lack of QA isn't a problem. If
> the messages are bothersome it can be fixed.

We're going to spew messages in ext3/4 for orphan inodes as well
(thanks for Cristoph for pointing that out). I can put in a similar
kludge, but maybe there should be a _set_nlink() that skips the check?
We do our own more sophisticated check in and will do appropriate
error handling in ext4_iget() anyway, so it's just a waste in that
particular codepath anyway.

- Ted

 \ /
  Last update: 2012-01-11 16:27    [W:0.062 / U:22.964 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site