Re: relatime: update once per day patches (was: ext3 IO latency
measurements)
[Posted March 31, 2009 by corbet]
| From: |
| Andrew Morton <akpm-AT-linux-foundation.org> |
| To: |
| Frans Pop <elendil-AT-planet.nl> |
| Subject: |
| Re: relatime: update once per day patches (was: ext3 IO latency
measurements) |
| Date: |
| Thu, 26 Mar 2009 08:47:33 -0700 |
| Message-ID: |
| <20090326084733.156c4910.akpm@linux-foundation.org> |
| Cc: |
| mingo-AT-elte.hu, tytso-AT-mit.edu, jack-AT-suse.cz,
torvalds-AT-linux-foundation.org, alan-AT-lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk,
arjan-AT-infradead.org, a.p.zijlstra-AT-chello.nl, npiggin-AT-suse.de,
jens.axboe-AT-oracle.com, drees76-AT-gmail.com, jesper-AT-krogh.cc,
linux-kernel-AT-vger.kernel.org, oleg-AT-redhat.com, roland-AT-redhat.com |
| Archive‑link: | |
Article |
On Thu, 26 Mar 2009 16:32:38 +0100 Frans Pop <elendil@planet.nl> wrote:
> Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Thu, 26 Mar 2009 15:03:12 +0100 Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> wrote:
> >> Why arent the relatime patches upstream?
> >
> > They have been for ages.
>
> I assume Ingo means the patches to make relatime update atime at least
> once per day to ensure better compatibility with apps that do use or rely
> on access times.
> These patches are already being included by several distros and, FWIW,
> Debian would like to see them upstream as well because we feel .
>
> They were last submitted by Matthew Garrett:
> http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/11/27/234
> http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/11/27/235
>
> Loads of people seem to want this, but even though it's been submitted at
> least twice and discussed even more often, it never gets anywhere.
>
Hard-wiring a 24-hour interval into the core VFS for all mounted
filesystems is dumb.
I (and others) pointed out that it would be better to implement this as
a mount option. That suggestion was met with varying sillinesses and
that is where things stand.
