Looks like I sent the following message to an obsolete mailing list...
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2005 22:33:40 -0800 (PST)
From: Junfeng Yang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Linux Kernel Mailing List <[email protected]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED],
[EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [MC] [CHECKER] Do ext2,
jfs and reiserfs respect mount -o sync/dirsync option?
Hi,
FiSC (our file system checker) emits several warnings on ext2, jfs and
reiserfs, complaining that diretories or files are lost while FiSC
believes they should already be persistent on disk. (ext3 behaves
correctly.)
All warnings boil down to a single cause: when these file systems are
mounted -o sync or dirsync, dirty blocks are still written out
asynchronously. It appears to me that these mount options don't have any
effect on these file systems. Is this the intended behavior?
man mount shows:
sync All I/O to the file system should be done
synchronously.
dirsync
All directory updates within the file system should
be
done synchronously. This affects the following
system
calls: creat, link, unlink, symlink, mkdir, rmdir,
mknod
and rename.
Any clafirication on this would be very helpful,
-Junfeng
_______________________________________________
MC mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://keeda.stanford.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mc
