From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.nokia.com ([192.100.122.230] helo=mgw-mx03.nokia.com) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.69 #1 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1Nh1qG-0001Ay-Bz for linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org; Mon, 15 Feb 2010 14:22:32 +0000 Subject: Re: noatime and nodiratime for ubifs mounting From: Artem Bityutskiy To: twebb In-Reply-To: References: <1265726904.2006.157.camel@localhost> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Date: Mon, 15 Feb 2010 16:21:23 +0200 Message-ID: <1266243683.11659.106.camel@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Cc: linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org Reply-To: dedekind1@gmail.com List-Id: Linux MTD discussion mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Mon, 2010-02-15 at 09:10 -0500, twebb wrote: > >>> To minimize unnecessary writes to UBIFS, does it make sense to mount > >>> with the noatime and nodiratime flags? Some information I've read > >>> suggests that this helps minimize writes and is beneficial to > >>> flash-based filesystems. Is there any downside to using these flags? > >> > >> UBIFS does not support atime anyway: > >> > >> http://www.linux-mtd.infradead.org/faq/ubifs.html#L_atime > >> > > > > Thanks. Sorry, I hadn't seen that specific question. > > > > Does that mean UBIFS also doesn't support 'diratime'? > > > > Sorry to ask again, but does no "atime" support mean no "diratime" > either for UBIFS? Yes, obviously. -- Best Regards, Artem Bityutskiy (Артём Битюцкий)