lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Aug]   [6]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [more markup]  [less markup]  [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
DateMon, 6 Aug 2007 08:57:12 +0200
FromIngo Molnar <>
SubjectRe: [PATCH 00/23] per device dirty throttling -v8
* Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu> wrote:

> In your example above, maybe it's the opposite, users know they can 
> keep a file in /tmp one more week by simply cat'ing it.

sure - and i'm not arguing that noatime should the kernel-wide default. 
In every single patch i sent it was a .config option (and a boot option 
_and_ a sysctl option that i think you missed) that a user/distro 
enables or disabled. But i think the /tmp argument is not very strong: 
/tmp is fundamentally volatile, and you can grow dependencies on pretty 
much _any_ aspect of the kernel. So the question isnt "is there impact" 
(there is, at least for noatime), the question is "is it still worth 
doing it".
> Changing the kernel in a non-easily reversible way is not kind to the 
> users.

none of my patches did any of that...

anyway, my latest patch doesnt do noatime, it does the "more intelligent 
relatime" approach.

	Ingo
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2007-08-06 07:01    [from the cache]
©2003-2008