On Sun, Dec 22, 2013 at 11:06:19AM +0100, Tom Gundersen wrote: > On Sat, Dec 21, 2013 at 7:11 PM, Chris Murphy <li...@colorremedies.com> wrote: > > > > On Dec 21, 2013, at 6:44 AM, Kay Sievers <k...@vrfy.org> wrote: > > > >> Trimming should be the job of the filesystem, not for a nasty cron > >> job. We do not want to support legacy filesystems with upstream > >> shipped systemd units. > >> > >> Also, util-linux must not ship such policy, it's a collection of > >> tools, not a system policy carry-out. > > > > Well it's the job of the file system, the device mapper, the block layer, > > the ATA driver, the controller and then the drive. And at the bottom of > > this stack, the drive specification, is flawed. We're not going to see the > > file systems doing this in ideal fashion, none of them set discard by > > default, until everything below is properly enabling asynchronous queued > > TRIM. > > > > So the question is whether it makes sense to design a work around for what > > amount to legacy devices (even though they are still being bought and sold > > today), or entirely ignore this (automatic) optimization for the life of > > the devices and leave it up to the user to set such things. > > > >> We need to support fsck because it's needed for integrity and using > >> filesystems that need, but running trim is just an optimization. We do > >> not want the bugs for these filesystems triggered by the systemd > >> package. > > > > It seems systemd now parses fstab and can second guess its contents, e.g. > > it will ignore fs_passno for Btrfs, so even if it's a non-zero value, > > systemd doesn't cause fsck to go looking for an fsck.btrfs. > > > > But it does for xfs, which likewise doesn't need fsck at all. > > We don't actually check for btrfs, but simply skip any checking when > /sbin/fsck.<fstype> does not exist. > > > I don't know if these optimizations really belong in systemd or rather in a > > smarter fsck to keep a list of file systems that do and don't need fsck > > performed on them prior to remount as rw. > > I'd argue that the systemd behavior of ignoring missing helpers should > just be moved to fsck...
OK, I have improved fsck, so it does not print any error message if fsck.<type> does not exist and the filesystem type is not in "really wanted" set of the filesystems (the set was defined many years ago by Ted and it's mostly about extN;-). # blkid -s TYPE /dev/sdb /dev/sdb: TYPE="btrfs" # fsck /dev/sdb; echo $? fsck from util-linux 2.24.184-663b-dirty 0 Karel -- Karel Zak <k...@redhat.com> http://karelzak.blogspot.com _______________________________________________ systemd-devel mailing list systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel