Skip to contentSkip to conversation

FAILED: patch "[PATCH] ext4: check for shutdown and r/o file system in" failed to apply to 4.14-stable tree

PATCH [email protected] 1 participant 2 messages Jan 7, 2019

Subsystems (2)
lore
Share & tools
lore

[email protected]

author maintainer
#0 lore raw

The patch below does not apply to the 4.14-stable tree.
If someone wants it applied there, or to any other stable or longterm tree, then please email the backport, including the original git commit id to <[email protected]>.

thanks,

greg k-h

------------------ original commit in Linus's tree ------------------

From 18f2c4fcebf2582f96cbd5f2238f4f354a0e4847 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Theodore Ts'o <[email protected]>
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2018 14:36:58 -0500
Subject: [PATCH] ext4: check for shutdown and r/o file system in
ext4_write_inode()

If the file system has been shut down or is read-only, then ext4_write_inode() needs to bail out early.

Also use jbd2_complete_transaction() instead of ext4_force_commit() so we only force a commit if it is needed.

fs/ext4/inode.c +7 -2
index 664b434ba836..9affabd07682 100644
@@ -5400,9 +5400,13 @@ int ext4_write_inode(struct inode *inode, struct writeback_control *wbc)
 {
 	int err;
 
-	if (WARN_ON_ONCE(current->flags & PF_MEMALLOC))
+	if (WARN_ON_ONCE(current->flags & PF_MEMALLOC) ||
+	    sb_rdonly(inode->i_sb))
 		return 0;
 
+	if (unlikely(ext4_forced_shutdown(EXT4_SB(inode->i_sb))))
+		return -EIO;
+
 	if (EXT4_SB(inode->i_sb)->s_journal) {
 		if (ext4_journal_current_handle()) {
 			jbd_debug(1, "called recursively, non-PF_MEMALLOC!\n");
@@ -5418,7 +5422,8 @@ int ext4_write_inode(struct inode *inode, struct writeback_control *wbc)
 		if (wbc->sync_mode != WB_SYNC_ALL || wbc->for_sync)
 			return 0;
 
-		err = ext4_force_commit(inode->i_sb);
+		err = jbd2_complete_transaction(EXT4_SB(inode->i_sb)->s_journal,
+						EXT4_I(inode)->i_sync_tid);
 	} else {
 		struct ext4_iloc iloc;
 
author maintainer
#1 lore raw
Quoted 2 lines · On Mon, Jan 07, 2019 at 04:05:53PM +0100, [email protected] wrote:

The patch below does not apply to the 4.14-stable tree.

Oops, no, typo, that should be "4.9", 4.14 was fine.

thanks,

greg k-h