(2011/01/21 1:09), Josef Bacik wrote:
> I'd rather we go through and have these things return an error than do a
> BUG_ON(). We're moving towards a more stable BTRFS, not one that panics more
> often :).
Yes, I also think so.
This patch is my first step.
My modification policy is as follows:
1. short term
- To more stable BTRFS, the part that should be corrected is clarified.
- The panic is not done by the NULL pointer reference etc.
2. long term
- BUG_ON() is decreased by using the forced-readonly framework(already posted
by Liu Bo),
etc.
Thanks,
Itoh
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
