Re: Worse yet Re: Whoops! Re: [PATCH] Another semi-critical one... (was Re: towards 0.91 )

[erich]

"Yoshinori K. Okuji" <address@hidden> wrote:

> At Mon, 29 Oct 2001 21:16:50 +0100,
> Thierry Laronde wrote:
> > My tests were made with 2.2.x... So it's not 2.4.x specific.
> 
> Really?! That's too bad!
> 
> > I have neither no time to really dive in the code to see what the hell's
> > going on.
> 
> Ok. Any volunteers on this list?

Thierry, this Linux behavior being described disturbs the heck out of me
so I just want to be clear:

Are you talking about tests with the loopback device?  Or do you know
this problem is endemic with all device types.

The loopback device in Linux has some shortcuts in it (at least it did
as of some time ago when I looked at it), so I could believe that "sync"
didn't work quite correctly with it.

I have never had any such problem with a non-journaled FS on Linux,
but I've only pointed to hardware devices.


The "mount -o remount" idea is a clever one, though.  I'll check into
whether it will cause a real remount operation (i.e. and flush the
journal on the unmount part).


--
    Erich Stefan Boleyn     <address@hidden>     http://www.uruk.org/
"Reality is truly stranger than fiction; Probably why fiction is so popular"