|
|
Subscribe / Log in / New account

No more ext4 maximal mount count

Those of us who have been at this for a while will have many fond memories of the "/dev/foo has reached maximal mount count" boot-time message, followed by a time-consuming full check of the filesystem in question. The recollection of times when one was standing in front of a room full of people and already late to start a presentation brings a special sort of joy. But it's likely that few of us remember the last time we saw such a message on a newer ext4 filesystem; now the documentation is catching up.

The mount-count check was there to force an occasional fsck run just in case some silent corruption might have found its way into the filesystem. The tune2fs command has had the ability to disable these checks since 1993, but the man page has long admonished against it:

You should strongly consider the consequences of disabling mount-count-dependent checking entirely. Bad disk drives, cables, memory, and kernel bugs could all corrupt a filesystem without marking the filesystem dirty or in error.

The only problem here is that the mount-count-dependent checking was disabled by default in 2011. Or, as Eric Sandeen put it: "We did 'strongly consider the consequences' and disabled it by default". On the theory that there is "no need to scare the user about it now", he has proposed that this text be removed from the man page in favor of gentler text suggesting that some users may want to turn the feature back on. One suspects that most of us, though, are happier without random fsck delays; the more worried among us would probably rather schedule regular checks at predictable times.


to post comments

No more ext4 maximal mount count

Posted Jul 22, 2017 1:41 UTC (Sat) by gerdesj (subscriber, #5446) [Link]

" On the theory that there is "no need to scare the user about it now", ... One suspects that most of us, though, are happier without random fsck delays; the more worried among us would probably rather schedule regular checks at predictable times."

Like many here I've used one or two filesystems for a while now. I'd like to think I have a fairly good handle on when to worry about my data's integrity. That said, I am not a fs dev.

I'd love to see an article here on LWN, informed by fs devs, that gave me more than some vague waffle (which is called out as out of date here) in the man page.

Cheers
Jon


Copyright © 2017, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds