From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from 220-245-31-42.static.tpgi.com.au ([220.245.31.42]:35456 "EHLO smtp.sws.net.au" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751177AbbLBGZi (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 Dec 2015 01:25:38 -0500 From: Russell Coker To: Eric Sandeen Subject: Re: Bug/regression: Read-only mount not read-only Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2015 17:25:32 +1100 Cc: Chris Mason , Hugo Mills , Btrfs mailing list References: <20151128134634.GF24333@carfax.org.uk> <20151201190018.GD8918@ret.masoncoding.com> <565DEF65.4080900@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <565DEF65.4080900@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="windows-1252" Message-Id: <201512021725.32750.russell@coker.com.au> Sender: linux-btrfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Wed, 2 Dec 2015 06:05:09 AM Eric Sandeen wrote: > yes, xfs does; we have "-o norecovery" if you don't want that, or need > to mount a filesystem with a dirty log on a readonly device. That option also works with Ext3/4 so it seems to be a standard way of dealing with this. I think that BTRFS should do what Ext3/4 and XFS do in this regard. -- My Main Blog http://etbe.coker.com.au/ My Documents Blog http://doc.coker.com.au/