Hugo Mills posted on Wed, 02 Dec 2015 23:51:55 +0000 as excerpted: > On Thu, Dec 03, 2015 at 07:40:08AM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote: >> >> Not remountable is very good to implement it. >> Makes things super easy to do. >> >> Or we will need to add log replay for remount time. >> >> I'd like to implement it first for non-remountable case as a try. And >> for the option name, I prefer something like "notreereplay", but I >> don't consider it the best one yet.... > > Thinking out loud... > > no-log-replay, no-log, hard-ro, ro-log, > really-read-only-i-mean-it-this-time-honest-guvnor > > Delete hyphens at your pleasure.
I want the bikeshed green with black polkadots! =:^) More seriously, ro-noreplay ? As Hugo says, norecovery clashes with the recovery option we already have, so unless we _really_ want to maintain cross-filesystem mount option compatibility, that's not going to work. I'm not sure we want to encourage thinking of it as a log, since it's not a log in the journalling-filesystem sense but much more limited. And I think ro needs to be in there for clarity. hard-ro strikes my fancy as well, but ro-noreplay seems clearer to me. -- Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. "Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
