[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <E1LOBlz-0001tI-Oo@be1.7eggert.dyndns.org>
Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2009 15:03:39 +0100
From: Bodo Eggert <7eggert@....de>
To: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@...deen.net>, Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu,
Eric Sandeen <sandeen@...hat.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
t-sato@...jp.nec.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Allow SysRq emergency sync to thaw frozen filesystems
Eric Sandeen <sandeen@...deen.net> wrote:
> Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu wrote:
>> On Thu, 15 Jan 2009 21:59:10 CST, Eric Sandeen said:
>>> Oh, actually, I'd think not. If the freeze was done properly by the
>>> filesystem, all data was flushed, the fs was quiesced, and new IO was
>>> blocked. pdflush should never be visiting these...
>>
>> Yes, but a lot of 'if's - and usually you're reaching for sysrq-S precisely
>> *because* you suspect that stuff wasn't happening properly on its own...
>
> Actually, only one if - if the fs implemented freeze properly.
>
> Well, the use case I envision here is something like:
>
> # freeze /my/mount/point/to/fs/to/snapshot
>
> except oops, that wasn't mounted, and you just froze your root fs.
Maybe freeze should protect against that by requiring to specify the exact
mountpount, unless you say freeze --subdir?
--
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