Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S934517AbZC0CFe (ORCPT ); Thu, 26 Mar 2009 22:05:34 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753551AbZC0CFU (ORCPT ); Thu, 26 Mar 2009 22:05:20 -0400 Received: from cpsmtpm-eml105.kpnxchange.com ([195.121.3.9]:52878 "EHLO CPSMTPM-EML105.kpnxchange.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751889AbZC0CFS (ORCPT ); Thu, 26 Mar 2009 22:05:18 -0400 From: Frans Pop To: Linus Torvalds Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] Make relatime default Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2009 03:05:09 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.9 Cc: alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk, mjg@redhat.com, tytso@mit.edu, mingo@elte.hu, jack@suse.cz, akpm@linux-foundation.org, arjan@infradead.org, a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl, npiggin@suse.de, jens.axboe@oracle.com, drees76@gmail.com, jesper@krogh.cc, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, oleg@redhat.com, roland@redhat.com References: <20090325235041.GA11024@duck.suse.cz> <20090326090630.GA9369@elte.hu> <20090326113705.GV32307@mit.edu> <20090326140312.GB14822@elte.hu> <20090326144707.GA6239@mit.edu> <20090326170714.GF6239@mit.edu> <20090326174956.GB7198@srcf.ucam.org> <20090326175314.GC7198@srcf.ucam.org> <20090326184838.26166549@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> <20090326184838.26166549@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> In-reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200903270305.14392.elendil@planet.nl> X-OriginalArrivalTime: 27 Mar 2009 02:05:15.0135 (UTC) FILETIME=[782298F0:01C9AE80] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2014 Lines: 42 On Friday 27 March 2009, you wrote: > On Fri, 27 Mar 2009, Frans Pop wrote: > > I guess users and distros can still elect not to set it as default, > > but it still seems a bit like going from one extreme to another. > > Why? RELATIME has been around since 2006 now. Nothing has happened. > People who think "we should leave it up to user land" lost their > credibility long ago. As I think Andrew already noted, the discussion today is largely a rehash of one in 2007, summarized by lwn [1] and kerneltrap [2]. That's also when Ingo first submitted the patch (based on a suggestion from you). But it has been blocked by others twice, and for exactly the same reasons. relatime *without* the 24-hour safeguard has unanimously been deemed unsuitable as a default by distros. So the real problem is that nobody ever did the work needed to make Ingo's original patch acceptable to the fs devs and the resulting stalemate for the last 1 3/4 years. IMO that's mainly a kernel community failure and not a user land failure. You've now at least broken that stalemate. Your statement is also not quite true. At least Ubuntu has had relatime enabled by default for new installations for a couple of releases. And AFAICT they now even have it enabled by default now in their kernel config, but I'm not entirely sure. For Debian Lenny (current stable release), relatime is a mount option that can be activated during new installs (admittedly only if you look hard enough). All that would have been needed for Debian to enable relatime by default for new installs was to have something like the *first* patch of the three you've now committed to have been included in 2.6.26. Cheers, FJP [1] http://lwn.net/Articles/244829/ [2] http://kerneltrap.org/node/14148 -- 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/