From: Tejun Heo Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] ext4: Deprecate barrier= and nobarrier mount options Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2011 11:51:39 +0100 Message-ID: <20110126105139.GJ12520@htj.dyndns.org> References: <20110126071200.GE32261@tux1.beaverton.ibm.com> <20110126072329.GK27190@tux1.beaverton.ibm.com> <20110126093632.GB12520@htj.dyndns.org> <20110126104734.GA23245@quack.suse.cz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: "Darrick J. Wong" , Vivek Goyal , axboe@kernel.dk, tytso@mit.edu, shli@kernel.org, neilb@suse.de, adilger.kernel@dilger.ca, snitzer@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kmannth@us.ibm.com, cmm@us.ibm.com, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, rwheeler@redhat.com, hch@lst.de, josef@redhat.com To: Jan Kara Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20110126104734.GA23245@quack.suse.cz> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ext4.vger.kernel.org Hello, On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 11:47:34AM +0100, Jan Kara wrote: > Ted should have a final word about this but I believe it's possible to > deprecate the mount options. Maybe with some transition period where > deprecation message is shown but the option actually still works. That > being said I'm not sure what we should do when someone has a disk with two > partitions and one partition is mounted with barriers and another one > without them - sure, one has to think hard to find a sane use case for this > (possibly if user does not care about data after a crash on one of the > partitions, in which case he should probably use nojournal mode) but it > should probably work. The policy can be made per-bdev (which maps to per-partition), so I don't think that's a big problem. Thanks. -- tejun