From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from ey-out-1920.google.com ([74.125.78.150])
	by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69 #1 (Red Hat Linux))
	id 1Nerbh-0003Wf-Qp
	for linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org; Tue, 09 Feb 2010 15:02:34 +0000
Received: by ey-out-1920.google.com with SMTP id 4so1270136eyg.26
	for <linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org>;
	Tue, 09 Feb 2010 07:02:27 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <1265726904.2006.157.camel@localhost>
References: <dbdb2ea61002090633h770779a5gfa640a3fd6112c22@mail.gmail.com>
	<1265726904.2006.157.camel@localhost>
Date: Tue, 9 Feb 2010 10:02:22 -0500
Message-ID: <dbdb2ea61002090702y41bfa719k73c4b2c5125d3be3@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: noatime and nodiratime for ubifs mounting
From: twebb <taliaferro62@gmail.com>
To: dedekind1@gmail.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: Linux MTD discussion mailing list <linux-mtd.lists.infradead.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/options/linux-mtd>,
	<mailto:linux-mtd-request@lists.infradead.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-mtd/>
List-Post: <mailto:linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org>
List-Help: <mailto:linux-mtd-request@lists.infradead.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mtd>,
	<mailto:linux-mtd-request@lists.infradead.org?subject=subscribe>

>> To minimize unnecessary writes to UBIFS, does it make sense to mount
>> with the noatime and nodiratime flags? =A0Some information I've read
>> suggests that this helps minimize writes and is beneficial to
>> flash-based filesystems. =A0Is 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'?