[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <54F55F40.6010508@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 03 Mar 2015 08:14:08 +0100
From: "Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)" <mtk.manpages@...il.com>
To: "Darrick J. Wong" <darrick.wong@...cle.com>
CC: mtk.manpages@...il.com, Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>,
Eric Sandeen <sandeen@...hat.com>,
Ext4 Developers List <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux btrfs Developers List <linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org>,
XFS Developers <xfs@....sgi.com>, linux-man@...r.kernel.org,
Linux-Fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux API <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Documenting MS_LAZYTIME
On 02/27/2015 06:51 PM, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 09:01:10AM +0100, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
>> On 02/27/2015 01:04 AM, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
>>> On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 02:36:33PM +0100, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
>>>>
>>>> The disadvantage of MS_STRICTATIME | MS_LAZYTIME is that
>>>> in the case of a system crash, the atime and mtime fields
>>>> on disk might be out of date by at most 24 hours.
>>>
>>> I'd change to "The disadvantage of MS_LAZYTIME is that..." and
>>> perhaps move that so it's clear it applies to any use of MS_LAZYTIME
>>> has this as a downside.
>>>
>>> Does that make sense?
>>
>> Thanks, Ted. Got it. So, now we have:
>>
>> MS_LAZYTIME (since Linux 3.20)
>
> "since Linux 4.0".
D'oh! Yes, thanks. Fixed.
Cheers,
Michael
--
Michael Kerrisk
Linux man-pages maintainer; http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/
Linux/UNIX System Programming Training: http://man7.org/training/
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists