xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [TuxOnIce-devel] Latest updates.

To: Nathan Scott <nscott@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [TuxOnIce-devel] Latest updates.
From: Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2010 19:11:40 +1100
Cc: TuxOnIce Devel List <tuxonice-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20100113065740.GN17483@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <20100113054152.GL17483@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <99724068.1731191263362718752.JavaMail.root@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20100113065740.GN17483@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17)
On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 05:57:40PM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 05:05:18PM +1100, Nathan Scott wrote:
> > [Looks like tuxonice is a subscriber-only list...]
> > 
> > ----- "Dave Chinner" <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > 
> > > On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 02:09:14PM +1100, Nathan Scott wrote:
> > > > > 
> > > Agreed that it is trivial to implement but there are still some
> > > definite traps - like the fact the sb change transaction may be
> > > logged
> > > immediately but the physical superblock may not get written for some
> > > time after the mount.
> > 
> > *nod* ... it will be written when unmounted though...
> 
> suspend in the kernel doesn't unmount filesystems. I have no idea
> what tuxonice does these days, but last time I heard it left them
> mounted but frozen over the suspend/resume cycle.

I found the code - it doesn't unmount filesystems. The git tree is
here:

http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/nigelc/tuxonice-head.git;a=summary

It appears that it walks the list of superblocks to grab the block
device off each mounted superblock to do it's work, so I don't see
any fundamental problem with using an attribute hanging off
sb->s_root to hold the boot time...

Cheers,

Dave.
-- 
Dave Chinner
david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>