Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Fri, 16 Nov 2001 03:34:27 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Fri, 16 Nov 2001 03:34:17 -0500 Received: from vasquez.zip.com.au ([203.12.97.41]:20498 "EHLO vasquez.zip.com.au") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Fri, 16 Nov 2001 03:34:12 -0500 Message-ID: <3BF4CF5C.18CBE4BC@zip.com.au> Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2001 00:33:32 -0800 From: Andrew Morton X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.4.14-pre8 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jeff Garzik CC: "Stephen C. Tweedie" , lkml , Neil Brown Subject: Re: synchronous mounts In-Reply-To: <3BF376EC.EA9B03C8@zip.com.au> <20011115214525.C14221@redhat.com> <3BF45B9F.DEE1076B@mandrakesoft.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Jeff Garzik wrote: > > As it stands, it seems like redefining 'sync' to sync less data than is > currently done is not only changing current behavior, but providing less > to users overall. > Persuasively argued. You appear to have your wish, as this patch was merged in -pre5. A `dirsync' option does make sense though, for the reasons which Stephen outlined. The whole handling of synchronous operations needs a rip-up-and-rewrite anyway. We're currently holding onto a stack of locks while waiting for the disk to spin round and round. It's a great scalability bottleneck for multiple threads doing things in the same directory. This is something I shall look at when the kernel versions turn odd. - - 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/