On Wed, 2017-03-08 at 11:29 -0500, Jeff Layton wrote:
> If launder_page fails, then we hit a problem writing back some inode
> data. Ensure that we communicate that fact in a subsequent fsync
> since
> another task could still have it open for write.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jlay...@redhat.com>
> ---
> mm/truncate.c | 6 +++++-
> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/truncate.c b/mm/truncate.c
> index 6263affdef88..29ae420a5bf9 100644
> --- a/mm/truncate.c
> +++ b/mm/truncate.c
> @@ -594,11 +594,15 @@ invalidate_complete_page2(struct address_space
> *mapping, struct page *page)
>
> static int do_launder_page(struct address_space *mapping, struct
> page *page)
> {
> + int ret;
> +
> if (!PageDirty(page))
> return 0;
> if (page->mapping != mapping || mapping->a_ops->launder_page
> == NULL)
> return 0;
> - return mapping->a_ops->launder_page(page);
> + ret = mapping->a_ops->launder_page(page);
> + mapping_set_error(mapping, ret);
> + return ret;
> }
>
> /**
No. At that layer, you don't know that this is a page error. In the NFS
case, it could, for instance, just as well be a fatal signal.
--
Trond Myklebust
Linux NFS client maintainer, PrimaryData
trond.mykleb...@primarydata.com
