From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from imap.thunk.org ([74.207.234.97]:49074 "EHLO imap.thunk.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750836AbaKYEpN (ORCPT ); Mon, 24 Nov 2014 23:45:13 -0500 Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2014 23:45:08 -0500 From: "Theodore Ts'o" To: Dave Chinner Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, Ext4 Developers List , xfs@oss.sgi.com, linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] vfs: don't let the dirty time inodes get more than a day stale Message-ID: <20141125044508.GG31339@thunk.org> References: <1416599964-21892-1-git-send-email-tytso@mit.edu> <1416599964-21892-4-git-send-email-tytso@mit.edu> <20141125015332.GE27262@dastard> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <20141125015332.GE27262@dastard> Sender: linux-btrfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 12:53:32PM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote: > On Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 02:59:23PM -0500, Theodore Ts'o wrote: > > Guarantee that the on-disk timestamps will be no more than 24 hours > > stale. > > > > Signed-off-by: Theodore Ts'o > > If we put these inodes on the dirty inode list with at writeback > time of 24 hours, this is completely unnecessary. What do you mean by "a writeback time of 24 hours"? Do you mean creating a new field in the inode which specifies when the writeback should happen? I still worry about the dirty inode list getting somewhat long large in the strictatime && lazytime case, and the inode bloat nazi's coming after us for adding a new field to struct inode structure. Or do you mean trying to abuse the dirtied_when field in some way? - Ted