On Sat, Aug 05, 2006 at 07:04:34PM +0200, Arjan van de Ven wrote: > the vfs shouldn't consider it clean, it should consider it > "atime-only dirty".. with that many of the vfs interaction issues > ought to go away should it be atime-dirty or non-critical-dirty? (ie. make it more generic to cover cases where we might have other non-critical fields to flush if we can but can tolerate loss if we dont) adminitedly atime is the only one i can think of now - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
