On Tue, 15 May 2012 13:34:45 -0500 Steve French <smfrench@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Why is "fsc" (in particular caching of reads, to file, for oplocked > files) mutually exclusive with "strictcache" (write through of > non-oplocked files). > The main purpose of cache=fsc is to allow you to cache file data between reboots (or technically, between mounts). That is contingent on being able to tell whether the cache is actually valid after rebooting however. cache=strict implies that you're following the cifs cache coherency protocol to the letter. The CIFS protocol effectively states that you are only allowed to cache file data while holding an oplock. Since you can't hold an oplock over a reboot, trusting fsc cached data across one would invalidate the guarantee that we try to provide with cache=strict. -- Jeff Layton <jlayton@xxxxxxxxxx> -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-cifs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
