From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from cn.fujitsu.com ([59.151.112.132]:17544 "EHLO heian.cn.fujitsu.com" rhost-flags-OK-FAIL-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756789AbbLBJXX (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 Dec 2015 04:23:23 -0500 Subject: Re: Bug/regression: Read-only mount not read-only To: Russell Coker , Eric Sandeen References: <20151128134634.GF24333@carfax.org.uk> <20151201190018.GD8918@ret.masoncoding.com> <565DEF65.4080900@redhat.com> <201512021725.32750.russell@coker.com.au> <565EB480.4010509@cn.fujitsu.com> CC: Chris Mason , Hugo Mills , Btrfs mailing list From: Qu Wenruo Message-ID: <565EB878.9090501@cn.fujitsu.com> Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2015 17:23:04 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <565EB480.4010509@cn.fujitsu.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format=flowed Sender: linux-btrfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Qu Wenruo wrote on 2015/12/02 17:06 +0800: > > > Russell Coker wrote on 2015/12/02 17:25 +1100: >> 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. >> > BTW, does -o norecovery implies -o ro? > > If not, how does it keep the filesystem consistent? > > I'd like to follow that ext2/xfs behavior, but I'm not familiar with > those filesystems. > > Thanks, > Qu > OK, norecovery implies ro. So I think it's possible to do the same thing for btrfs. I'll try to do it soon. Thanks, Qu > > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html