From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG  Fri May  9 20:39:31 2003
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org
Received: by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix, from userid 931)
	id EED5B37B401; Fri,  9 May 2003 20:39:31 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Fri, 9 May 2003 22:39:31 -0500
From: Juli Mallett <jmallett@FreeBSD.org>
To: Ian Dowse <iedowse@maths.tcd.ie>
Message-ID: <20030509223931.A75707@FreeBSD.org>
References: <20030509203228.A62797@FreeBSD.org>
	<200305100302.aa28788@salmon.maths.tcd.ie>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5.1i
In-Reply-To: <200305100302.aa28788@salmon.maths.tcd.ie>;
	from iedowse@maths.tcd.ie on Sat, May 10, 2003 at 03:02:37AM +0100
X-Title: Code Maven
X-Towel: Yes
X-Negacore: Yes
X-Authentication-Warning: localhost: juli pwned teh intarweb
cc: freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.org
cc: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
cc: Lukas Ertl <l.ertl@univie.ac.at>
Subject: Re: newfs: useless/bogus check if new last block can be accessed?
X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Filesystems <freebsd-fs.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-fs>,
	<mailto:freebsd-fs-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-fs>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-fs@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-fs-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-fs>,
	<mailto:freebsd-fs-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 10 May 2003 03:39:32 -0000

* Ian Dowse <iedowse@maths.tcd.ie> [ Date: 2003-05-09 ]
	[ w.r.t. Re: newfs: useless/bogus check if new last block can be accessed? ]
> In message <20030509203228.A62797@FreeBSD.org>, Juli Mallett writes:
> >(which went nowhere due to over-engineering, and too much faith...er, yeah,
> >it went nowhere), one of the things I wanted to do was have a "naive" flag
> >as part of an (undeveloped) generalised flags (external, not like MINE_)
> >interface, which would let libufs do the exploding, if things went wrong.
> 
> Something like the patch below should do the trick for now. This
> puts back the old exit code and sector number information, but
> relies on the undocumented (?) behaviour of bwrite() leaving a
> sensible value in errno.

That looks pretty sane.  And bwrite is undocumented.  All contracts
are explicit for now.  Once it's documented that changes.

Thanx,
juli.
-- 
juli mallett. email: jmallett@freebsd.org; efnet: juli;