[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4E380D19.7030307@parallels.com>
Date: Tue, 2 Aug 2011 11:43:37 -0300
From: Glauber Costa <glommer@...allels.com>
To: Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
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 08/02/2011 11:18 AM, Al Viro wrote:
> 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...
And how is it different from any fs-specific options, like the ones extX
have, for instance ? Many of them seem to operate on a superblock.
If you mount a superblock somewhere, you can tweak specifics about its
operation. If you mount it somewhere else, the assumption is you know
what you're doing.
--
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