On 8/19/25 4:45 PM, Dave Chinner wrote: > On Tue, Aug 19, 2025 at 10:38:54AM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote: ... >> Ok, this is getting a little more complex. The ENODATA problem is >> very specific, and has (oddly) been reported by users/customers twice >> in recent days. Maybe I can send an acceptable fix for that specific, >> observed problem (also suitable for -stable etc), then another >> one that is more ambitious on top of that. > > Right, the lowest risk, minimal targetted fix for the problem > reported is to remap the error in the attr layers. Nothing else is > then affected (ie. global changes of behaviour have significant > potential for unexpected regressions), but the issue is solved for > the users that are tripping over it. > > Then, if someone really wants to completely rearchitect how we > handle IO errors in XFS, that can be done as a separate project, > with it's own justification, design review, planning for > integration/deprecation/removal of existing error handling > infrastructure, etc. > > We do not tie acceptance of trivial bug fixes with a requirement to > completely rearchitect fundamental filesystem behaviours that are > only vaguely related to the bug that needs to be fixed. Agree, though I don't think (I hope) that any of this discussion was a NAK, just a "there might be a bigger problem to solve here, too" and I agree with that. I do want to push to get the demonstrable bug fixed in a direct, safe way first, though, and not bog it down with grander plans. I'll try to find time to do that, and look at the bigger problem, if I have the time and ability. :) Thanks, -Eric > -Dave.
