Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S262152AbVCDGek (ORCPT ); Fri, 4 Mar 2005 01:34:40 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262155AbVCDGej (ORCPT ); Fri, 4 Mar 2005 01:34:39 -0500 Received: from smtp3.Stanford.EDU ([171.67.16.138]:52449 "EHLO smtp3.Stanford.EDU") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S262340AbVCDGeJ (ORCPT ); Fri, 4 Mar 2005 01:34:09 -0500 Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2005 22:33:40 -0800 (PST) From: Junfeng Yang To: Linux Kernel Mailing List , , , cc: mc@cs.Stanford.EDU Subject: [CHECKER] Do ext2, jfs and reiserfs respect mount -o sync/dirsync option? Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1187 Lines: 36 Hi, FiSC (our file system checker) emits several warnings on ext2, jfs and reiserfs, complaining that diretories or files are lost while FiSC believes they should already be persistent on disk. (ext3 behaves correctly.) All warnings boil down to a single cause: when these file systems are mounted -o sync or dirsync, dirty blocks are still written out asynchronously. It appears to me that these mount options don't have any effect on these file systems. Is this the intended behavior? man mount shows: sync All I/O to the file system should be done synchronously. dirsync All directory updates within the file system should be done synchronously. This affects the following system calls: creat, link, unlink, symlink, mkdir, rmdir, mknod and rename. Any clafirication on this would be very helpful, -Junfeng - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/