lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2023]   [Jan]   [9]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 08/11] cifs: Remove call to filemap_check_wb_err()
On Mon, Jan 09, 2023 at 09:42:36AM -0500, Jeff Layton wrote:
> On Mon, 2023-01-09 at 05:18 +0000, Matthew Wilcox (Oracle) wrote:
> > filemap_write_and_wait() now calls filemap_check_wb_err(), so we cannot
> > glean any additional information by calling it ourselves. It may also
> > be misleading as it will pick up on any errors since the beginning of
> > time which may well be since before this program opened the file.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Matthew Wilcox (Oracle) <willy@infradead.org>
> > ---
> > fs/cifs/file.c | 8 +++-----
> > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/fs/cifs/file.c b/fs/cifs/file.c
> > index 22dfc1f8b4f1..7e7ee26cf77d 100644
> > --- a/fs/cifs/file.c
> > +++ b/fs/cifs/file.c
> > @@ -3042,14 +3042,12 @@ int cifs_flush(struct file *file, fl_owner_t id)
> > int rc = 0;
> >
> > if (file->f_mode & FMODE_WRITE)
> > - rc = filemap_write_and_wait(inode->i_mapping);
> > + rc = filemap_write_and_wait(file->f_mapping);
>
> If we're calling ->flush, then the file is being closed. Should this
> just be?
> rc = file_write_and_wait(file);
>
> It's not like we need to worry about corrupting ->f_wb_err at that
> point.

Yes, I think you're right, and then this is a standalone patch that can
go in this cycle, perhaps.

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2023-03-26 23:33    [W:0.067 / U:0.156 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site