On Fri, 2002-12-06 at 14:12, Andrew Morton wrote: > > It won't. There isn't really a sane way of doing this properly unless > we do something like: > > 1) Add a new flag to the superblock > 2) Set that flag against all r/w superblocks before starting the sync > 3) Use that flag inside the superblock walk. > > That would provide a reasonable solution, but I don't believe we > need to go to those lengths in 2.4, do you? Grin, I'm partial to changing sync_supers to allow the FS to leave s_dirt set in its write_super call. I see what ext3 gains from your current patch in the unmount case, but the sync case is really unchanged because of interaction with kupdate. Other filesystems trying to use the sync_fs() call might think adding one is enough to always get called on sync, and I think that will lead to unreliable sync implementations. -chris _______________________________________________ Ext3-users@redhat.com https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/ext3-users
