[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAAJw_ZvUqRmCCQ5-2PdFPRyfdzZMuphGU=hgAjUOHGk=n9Mheg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2012 07:23:14 +0800
From: Jeff Chua <jeff.chua.linux@...il.com>
To: Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka@...hat.com>
Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>, Lai Jiangshan <laijs@...fujitsu.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>, lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Recent kernel "mount" slow
On Sun, Nov 25, 2012 at 5:09 AM, Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka@...hat.com> wrote:
> So it's better to slow down mount.
I am quite proud of the linux boot time pitting against other OS. Even
with 10 partitions. Linux can boot up in just a few seconds, but now
you're saying that we need to do this semaphore check at boot up. By
doing so, it's inducing additional 4 seconds during boot up.
What about moving the locking mechanism to the "mount" program itself?
Won't that be more feasible?
As for the cases of simultaneous mounts, it's usually administrator
that's doing something bad. I would say this is not a kernel issue.
Jeff
--
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