From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754846AbZBWCLn (ORCPT ); Sun, 22 Feb 2009 21:11:43 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752473AbZBWCLe (ORCPT ); Sun, 22 Feb 2009 21:11:34 -0500 Received: from mx2.redhat.com ([66.187.237.31]:53196 "EHLO mx2.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752362AbZBWCLd (ORCPT ); Sun, 22 Feb 2009 21:11:33 -0500 Date: Sun, 22 Feb 2009 18:10:52 -0800 From: Jeff Layton To: Jeff Layton Cc: Horst Reiterer , Steve French , linux-cifs-client@lists.samba.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [linux-cifs-client] Re: [PATCH] fs/cifs: send SMB_COM_FLUSH in cifs_fsync Message-ID: <20090222181052.36763a2d@tupile.poochiereds.net> In-Reply-To: <20090222173446.2da6b182@tupile.poochiereds.net> References: <524f69650902201721l1c7f0d34p4708980a90d7fc8f@mail.gmail.com> <524f69650902221303h37feb366k3d89a07bfd100ea3@mail.gmail.com> <20090222173446.2da6b182@tupile.poochiereds.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sun, 22 Feb 2009 17:34:46 -0800 Jeff Layton wrote: > On Sun, 22 Feb 2009 22:12:11 +0100 (CET) > Horst Reiterer wrote: > > > On Sun, 22 Feb 2009, Steve French wrote: > > > Suggestions on what to call such a new mount option? How about > > > "nostrictfsync" ? > > > > Sound good, should be self-explanatory for Samba users and those familiar > > with the fsync concept. > > > > Horst. > > My suggestion would be to not add a new option until someone requests > it/complains about it. We already have a lot of unneeded/unused mount > options, and I think this will just be adding one to the pile. > > My $.02... > ...and to lend further strength to this argument, we're not doing this at close(), but rather at fsync(). posix is pretty clear about what's supposed to happen at fsync: "The fsync() function shall request that all data for the open file descriptor named by fildes is to be transferred to the storage device associated with the file described by fildes." ...if you don't want to take the performance penalty then don't use fsync(). If you're using fsync, then you care about data integrity and adding a mount option to disable it is rather pointless. -- Jeff Layton