[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20110802141806.GL2203@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Date: Tue, 2 Aug 2011 15:18:06 +0100
From: Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
To: Glauber Costa <glommer@...allels.com>
Cc: Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@...allels.com>,
Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>,
Nick Piggin <npiggin@...nel.dk>,
Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
Dave Hansen <dave@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
James Bottomley <JBottomley@...allels.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] parse options in the vfs level
On Tue, Aug 02, 2011 at 10:04:06AM -0300, Glauber Costa wrote:
> I am not sure either, but I still believe my proposal is superior to
> write-to-a-file specifically. Writing to a file, be it in proc, sys,
> or wherever, leaves a window of opportunity open between mounting a
> filesystem and limiting its caches. Doing it on mount is atomic.
>
> Effectively, I see this limit as a property of a particular instance
> of a mounted filesystem. Since all properties of a filesystem are
> specified during mount, this becomes a natural extension.
The trouble is, dentry tree is fundamentally a property of superblock.
It's shared between *all* instances of that fs in all mount trees...
--
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