Re: [patch] bug fix in dio handling write error - v2

> Taking one of your earlier idea, how about the following patch: separating
> out IO completion code from partial IO tracking?

I like that, and I think it closes the lost write error hole.  Could we
call it something like io_errno, though?  "completion_code" to me sounds
like -ve errno or +ve bytes read.

I think there are still bugs dealing with errors, but I guess we can
tackle them with seperate patches.

- z
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

---

• References:
  • RE: [patch] bug fix in dio handling write error - v2
    • From: "Chen, Kenneth W" <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: Merge strategy for klibc
• Next by Date: Re: [GIT PATCH] Remove devfs from 2.6.16
• Previous by thread: RE: [patch] bug fix in dio handling write error - v2
• Next by thread: Re: [patch] bug fix in dio handling write error - v2
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]