[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <46B77AB3.40006@redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 06 Aug 2007 15:46:59 -0400
From: Chuck Ebbert <cebbert@...hat.com>
To: Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
CC: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
J??rn Engel <joern@...fs.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
miklos@...redi.hu, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, neilb@...e.de,
dgc@....com, tomoki.sekiyama.qu@...achi.com, nikita@...sterfs.com,
trond.myklebust@....uio.no, yingchao.zhou@...il.com,
richard@....demon.co.uk, david@...g.hm
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/23] per device dirty throttling -v8
On 08/06/2007 03:37 PM, Alan Cox wrote:
>> We already tried that here. The response: "If noatime is so great, why
>> isn't it the default in the kernel?"
>
> Ok so we have a pile of people @redhat.com sitting on linux-kernel
> complaining about Red Hat distributions not taking it up. Guys - can
> we just fix it internally please like sensible folk ?
>
> Ingo's latest 'not quite noatime' seems to cure mutt/tmpwatch so it might
> finally make sense to do so.
Do we report max(ctime, mtime) as the atime by default when noatime
is set or do we still need that to be done?
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists