On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 04:28:23PM +0000, Steven Whitehouse wrote: > > I guess the same is true for other file systems which are mounted ro > too. So maybe a check for MS_RDONLY before doing the sync in those > cases? My original patch moved the sync_filesystem into the check for MS_RDONLY in the core VFS code. The objection was raised that there might be some file system out there that might depend on this behaviour. I can't imagine why, but I suppose it's at least theoretically possible. So the idea is that this particular patch is *guaranteed* not to make any difference. That way there can be no question about the patch'es correctness. I'm going to follow up with a patch for ext4 that does exactly that, but the idea is to allow each file system maintainer to do that for their own file system. I could do that as well for file systems that are "obviously" read-only, but then I'll find out that there's some wierd case where the file system can be used in a read-write fashion. (Example: UDF is normally used for DVD's, but at least in theory it can be used read/write --- I'm told that Windows supports read-write UDF file systems on USB sticks, and at least in theory it could be used as a inter-OS exchange format in situations where VFAT and exFAT might not be appropriate for various reasons.) Cheers, - Ted -- 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
