On Mon, 21 May 2012 13:34:05 +0800, Miao Xie wrote: > On Fri, 18 May 2012 14:52:07 +0200, David Sterba wrote: >> On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 07:58:21PM +0800, Miao Xie wrote: >>> --- a/fs/btrfs/super.c >>> +++ b/fs/btrfs/super.c >>> @@ -1151,6 +1151,8 @@ static int btrfs_remount(struct super_block *sb, int *flags, char *data) >>> /* pause restriper - we want to resume on remount to r/w */ >>> btrfs_pause_balance(root->fs_info); >>> >>> + btrfs_scrub_cancel(root); >> >> Can we possibly switch scrub to readonly instead ? I'm not sure what's >> the 'least surprise here', whether to cancel everything on the >> filesystem upon ro-remount or just the minimal set of operations (and >> leave the rest running if possible). > > I don't think it is better to switch scrub to readonly soundlessly, because > it is not the operation that the users expect if they don't choose the readonly > mode. Since David put me on CC for this thread, I state my humble opinion: If I manually remount read-only, I would expect that scrub is switched into read-only mode as well, not canceled. Plus a log message about this change. > BTW, I think we needn't cancel the readonly scrub on the filesystem upon ro-remount. > > Thanks > Miao > >> >> Looking at the scrub code, if dev->readonly is set, no repairs are done, >> so the only concern is to wait for any outstanding IOs and then switch >> to RO. >> >> >> david -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
