Theodore Tso wrote: > On Fri, Jan 16, 2009 at 10:17:09AM -0500, Valdis.Kletnieks@xxxxxx wrote: >> On Fri, 16 Jan 2009 09:48:28 +0100, Pavel Machek said: >> >>> Emergency Sync should not do this. Invent another key. >>> >>> ...because otherwise, if you hit emergency sync but the system is >>> still alive and relies on filesystem freezing, bad stuff will happen. >> Under what conditions would a system be alive and relying on freezing, >> *and* an emergency thaw would be worse than whatever reason you're doing >> an emergency sync? >> >> Hmm.. guess you *could* get into trouble if you tried to do a Sysrq-[not-s] >> and hit the wrong key - but you have the same danger if you have *any* >> sysrq- invoking an emergency_thaw and hit it by accident... > > My biggest complaint is that the two operations are largely > orthogonal. Emergency sync and unfreeze are two very different > operations, and while emergency sync is largely harmless, it just > seems really unclean to combine the two. For one thing, it'll be > extremely non-obvious that emergency sync implies unfreeze, and > changing the sysrq help to say emergency-Sync-and-unfreeze just > screams "kludge".... > > - Ted Yeah, they really are orthogonal, it's true. Ok, if people are willing to give up 'z' I'll move it there. -Eric -- 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
