On 28/06/2019 21:34, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> The chattr(1) manpage has this to say about the immutable bit that
> system administrators can set on files:
>
> "A file with the 'i' attribute cannot be modified: it cannot be deleted
> or renamed, no link can be created to this file, mos
On 15/02/19 00:06, Dave Chinner wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 14, 2019 at 02:00:07AM -0800, Omar Sandoval wrote:
>> From: Omar Sandoval
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Since statx was added in 4.11, userspace has had an interface for
>> reading btime (file creation time), but no way to set it. This RFC patch
>> series add
On 03/30/2017 09:35 PM, Jeff Layton wrote:
<>
> Yeah, I imagine we'd need a on-disk change for this unless there's
> something already present that we could use in place of a crash counter.
>
Perhaps we can use s_mtime and/or s_wtime in some way, I'm not sure
what is a parallel for that in xfs.
On 09/09/2015 03:40 PM, Austin S Hemmelgarn wrote:
> On 2015-09-09 08:12, Boaz Harrosh wrote:
>> On 09/09/2015 02:28 PM, Austin S Hemmelgarn wrote:
>>> On 2015-09-08 16:00, Elliott, Robert (Persistent Memory) wrote:
>> <>
>>
>>> this may actually mak
On 09/09/2015 02:28 PM, Austin S Hemmelgarn wrote:
> On 2015-09-08 16:00, Elliott, Robert (Persistent Memory) wrote:
<>
> this may actually make things slower (the particular effect of SSD mode
> is that it tries to spread allocations out as much as possible, as this
> helps with wear-leveling o
On 12/02/2014 02:58 PM, Jan Kara wrote:
> On Fri 28-11-14 13:14:21, Ted Tso wrote:
>> On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 06:23:23PM +0100, Jan Kara wrote:
>>> Hum, when someone calls fsync() for an inode, you likely want to sync
>>> timestamps to disk even if everything else is clean. I think that doing
>>> w
On 11/25/2014 06:33 AM, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
<>
>
> I was concerned about putting them on the dirty inode list because it
> would be extra inodes for the writeback threads would have to skip
> over and ignore (since they would not be dirty in the inde or data
> pages sense).
>
> Another solution
On 05/25/2012 06:35 PM, Alexander Block wrote:
> Hello,
>
> (this is a resend with proper CC for linux-fsdevel and linux-kernel)
>
> I would like to start a discussion on atime in Btrfs (and other
> filesystems with snapshot support).
>
> As atime is updated on every access of a file or directo
On 01/20/2011 08:27 AM, Andrew Morton wrote:
>
> Another way of doing all this would be to implement some sort of
> lookaside cache at the vfs->block boundary. At boot time, load that
> cache up with all the disk blocks which we know the boot will need (a
> single ascending pass across the disk)
On 11/25/2010 12:47 AM, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Tue, 23 Nov 2010 07:34:07 -0500
> Chris Mason wrote:
>
>> For btrfs there's only one bdi per SB, but for most everyone else a disk
>> with a bunch of partitions is going to have multiple filesystems on the
>> same bdi.
>
> um, please explain why
On 11/23/2010 12:54 PM, Nick Piggin wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 12:26:31PM +0200, Boaz Harrosh wrote:
>>> *
>>> * Invoke writeback_inodes_sb if no writeback is currently underway.
>>> * Returns 1 if writeback was started, 0 if not.
>>> + *
>&
On 11/23/2010 12:02 PM, Nick Piggin wrote:
>
> Taking s_umount lock inside i_mutex can result in an ABBA deadlock:
>
> ===
> [ INFO: possible circular locking dependency detected ]
> 2.6.37-rc3+ #26
>
On 07/24/2010 12:17 AM, Dan Magenheimer wrote:
>>> On Fri, Jul 23, 2010 at 06:58:03AM -0700, Dan Magenheimer wrote:
CHRISTOPH AND ANDREW, if you disagree and your concerns have
not been resolved, please speak up.
>>
>> Hi Christoph --
>>
>> Thanks very much for the quick (instantaneous?)
Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Mon, 2009-01-12 at 08:20 -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>> On Mon, 12 Jan 2009, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>>> You made it back into the locked version.
>> Btw, even if you probably had some reason for this, one thing to note is
>> that I think Chris' performance testing showed
14 matches
Mail list logo
