[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20091104111125.54C3.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com>
Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2009 11:18:05 +0900 (JST)
From: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
Cc: kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com,
Daniel Pittman <daniel@...space.net>,
Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <hmh@....eng.br>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>,
linux-pm@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
Maxim Levitsky <maximlevitsky@...il.com>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [linux-pm] Massive ext4 filesystem corruption after a failed s2disk/ram cycle
> On Wed, Oct 07, 2009 at 01:14:10PM +1100, Daniel Pittman wrote:
> > For what it is worth, I would also be quite interested to know /why/ XFS is
> > bad in this regard. Is it just the previously stated "XFS writes to disk
> > despite freezing kernel threads" issue, or something deeper?
>
> sync pushes out all data to disk, but in a journaling filesystem that
> might just but the log not the "normal" place on disk. For a boot
> loader to deal with it properly it actually needs to do an replay of
> the log. Grub does so for reiserfs but not for XFS for some reason.
> I don't know why problems don't trigger more often with ext3, though.
I'm sorry for the long delayed and offtopic responce. I discussed this
issue with okuji-san (GRUB2 maintainer) at several month ago.
He really wish linux implement real sync.
A bootloader has much constraint than OS (mainly caused by size constraint).
it can't implemnt jornal log replay logic for _all_ filesystem. Why can't we
implement storong sync syscall? I don't think this is PM nor bootloader fault.
--
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