Re: [PATCH] ovl: Allow changing default fsync_mode
Gao Xiang <[email protected]> Tue, 23 Jun 2026 17:25:12 +0800
| Newsgroups | org.kernel.vger.linux-unionfs |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On 2026/6/23 17:15, Yafang Shao wrote: > On Tue, Jun 23, 2026 at 5:00 PM Gao Xiang <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >> >> On 2026/6/23 16:43, Yafang Shao wrote: >>> We have enabled "volatile" fsync_mode on our Kubernetes production >>> environment to prevent container exit from being blocked when there >>> are many dirty pages to flush. This has worked well without introducing >>> any issues. >>> >>> However, on some of our production servers, upgrading the container >>> runtime to support the "volatile" mount option is not straightforward [0]. >>> To address this, we want to enable it by default within the kernel. >> >> Just a side note: "upgrade the container runtime is not >> straightforward", how? it seems that issue is already resolved and >> there is no more discussion. > > We still have many production servers running Docker, while the > "volatile" mount option is only supported by containerd. Upgrading > from Docker to containerd is a difficult process. But docker can be patched too: if upgrading the userspace is hard, why upgrading the linux kernel is easy? > >> >> Not quite sure applying a default volatile policy is quite feasible, >> especially the issue documented in >> https://github.com/containerd/containerd/pull/10274/files#diff-9239161e2af83fd84df5792f9fe64701c517fe4598eae60d4d245d039955f46cR33 >> >> then userspace cannot drop `volatile` option as a somewhat >> workaround now. > > OS vendors can still set "auto" as the default config, while customers > can override it dynamically via sysfs. We have been running with > "volatile" on many production servers across different workloads for > over a year, and it has worked as expected without any issues. but sysfs setting still applies as system-wide, and there are some edge cases that we cannot apply volatile as default, that is my one concern. The other concern is that since `volatile` omits fsync, so it's a posix violation (even that makes sense for container writable layers), not sure if we have to use it as the system-wide default configuration too. Thanks, Gao Xiang >