Unix & Linux Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for users of Linux, FreeBSD and other Un*x-like operating systems. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

I've several partitions with ext4.
Now, I would want if it makes sense to use tune2fs with flags -c0 (max-mount-counts) and -i0 (interval-between-checks) in the partitions with a journal file-system since it needs less checks?

share|improve this question
up vote 1 down vote accepted

Generally speaking... yes, it does make sense. Though you might want to run

tune2fs -l /dev/sdXY | egrep "Maxim|Check"

to see how those flags are set as it all depends on the version of e2fsprogs used to create the filesystems and/or distribution specific patches applied to e2fsprogs. You might already have MAX_MNT_COUNT and CHECKINTERVAL set to -1 and 0 respectively, due to the fact that, as of v. 1.42, e2fsprogs defaults to -c1 -i0, see changelog:

If the enable_periodic_fsck option is false in /etc/mke2fs.conf (which is the default), mke2fs will now set the s_max_mnt_count superblock field to -1, instead of 0. Kernels older then 3.0 will print a spurious message on each mount then they see a s_max_mnt_count set to 0, which will annoy users.

/etc/mke2fs.conf compared:

v. 1.41.14 released 2010-12-22:

    base_features = sparse_super,filetype,resize_inode,dir_index,ext_attr
    blocksize = 4096
    inode_size = 256
    inode_ratio = 16384

v. 1.42 released 2011-11-29:

    base_features = sparse_super,filetype,resize_inode,dir_index,ext_attr
    default_mntopts = acl,user_xattr
    enable_periodic_fsck = 0
    blocksize = 4096
    inode_size = 256
    inode_ratio = 16384
share|improve this answer

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.