From: Miklos Szeredi Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] Add timeout feature Date: Wed, 09 Jul 2008 08:22:56 +0200 Message-ID: References: <20080630212450t-sato@mail.jp.nec.com> <20080701081026.GB16691@infradead.org> <20080707110730.GG5643@ucw.cz> <20080708231026.GP11558@disturbed> <20080708232031.GE18195@elf.ucw.cz> <20080709005254.GQ11558@disturbed> <20080709010922.GE9957@mit.edu> <20080709061621.GA5260@infradead.org> Cc: miklos@szeredi.hu, tytso@mit.edu, pavel@suse.cz, hch@infradead.org, t-sato@yk.jp.nec.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, xfs@oss.sgi.com, dm-devel@redhat.com, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, axboe@kernel.dk, mtk.manpages@googlemail.com To: hch@infradead.org Return-path: In-reply-to: <20080709061621.GA5260@infradead.org> (message from Christoph Hellwig on Wed, 9 Jul 2008 02:16:21 -0400) Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ext4.vger.kernel.org On Wed, 9 Jul 2008, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Wed, Jul 09, 2008 at 08:13:21AM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote: > > This would mean that freeze and thaw will have to be done on the same > > file descriptor, but this isn't unreasonable to expect, is it? > > It is certainly not the current use case, where you run one command > to freeze the filesystem and another one to unfreeze it. So instead of freeze_fs mountpoint backup-command unfreeze_fs mountpoint the user would have do to run_freezed mountpoint backup-command I find the second one nicer, regardless of any reliability issues. Miklos