[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20251104165605.GI196370@frogsfrogsfrogs>
Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2025 08:56:05 -0800
From: "Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@...nel.org>
To: Gou Hao <gouhao@...ontech.com>
Cc: cem@...nel.org, corbet@....net, linux-xfs@...r.kernel.org,
linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
gouhaojake@....com, guanwentao@...ontech.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] xfs-doc: Fix typo error
On Tue, Nov 04, 2025 at 05:34:06PM +0800, Gou Hao wrote:
> online fsck may take longer than offline fsck...
>
> Signed-off-by: Gou Hao <gouhao@...ontech.com>
With hch's comments about the commit message addressed,
Reviewed-by: "Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@...nel.org>
--D
> ---
> Documentation/filesystems/xfs/xfs-online-fsck-design.rst | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/filesystems/xfs/xfs-online-fsck-design.rst b/Documentation/filesystems/xfs/xfs-online-fsck-design.rst
> index 8cbcd3c26434..55e727b5f12e 100644
> --- a/Documentation/filesystems/xfs/xfs-online-fsck-design.rst
> +++ b/Documentation/filesystems/xfs/xfs-online-fsck-design.rst
> @@ -249,7 +249,7 @@ sharing and lock acquisition rules as the regular filesystem.
> This means that scrub cannot take *any* shortcuts to save time, because doing
> so could lead to concurrency problems.
> In other words, online fsck is not a complete replacement for offline fsck, and
> -a complete run of online fsck may take longer than online fsck.
> +a complete run of online fsck may take longer than offline fsck.
> However, both of these limitations are acceptable tradeoffs to satisfy the
> different motivations of online fsck, which are to **minimize system downtime**
> and to **increase predictability of operation**.
> --
> 2.20.1
>
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists