[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:0.020 / U:1.652 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site