From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "J. Bruce Fields" Subject: Re: [PATCH] NFS server does not update mtime on setattr request Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2006 11:42:58 -0400 Message-ID: <20060607154258.GA22335@fieldses.org> References: <4485C3FE.5070504@redhat.com> <1149658707.27298.10.camel@localhost> <4486E662.5080900@redhat.com> <20060607151754.GB23954@fieldses.org> <4486F020.3030707@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Cc: Neil Brown , NFS List , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Trond Myklebust Return-path: Received: from sc8-sf-mx2-b.sourceforge.net ([10.3.1.92] helo=mail.sourceforge.net) by sc8-sf-list2-new.sourceforge.net with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Fo0Be-00075z-9x for nfs@lists.sourceforge.net; Wed, 07 Jun 2006 08:43:14 -0700 Received: from mail.fieldses.org ([66.93.2.214] helo=pickle.fieldses.org) by mail.sourceforge.net with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.44) id 1Fo0Bd-0001gY-TV for nfs@lists.sourceforge.net; Wed, 07 Jun 2006 08:43:14 -0700 To: Peter Staubach In-Reply-To: <4486F020.3030707@redhat.com> List-Id: "Discussion of NFS under Linux development, interoperability, and testing." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: nfs-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net Errors-To: nfs-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net On Wed, Jun 07, 2006 at 11:26:24AM -0400, Peter Staubach wrote: > J. Bruce Fields wrote: > >What's the basis for that interpretation? The language seems extremely > >clear: > > > > "On successful completion, if the file size is changed, these > > functions will mark for update the st_ctime and st_mtime fields > > of the file, and if the file is a regular file, the S_ISUID and > > S_ISGID bits of the file mode may be cleared." > > > >Why are you concerned about this? Do you have an actual application > >that breaks? > > Yes, there is a customer who is quite unhappy that the semantics over Linux > client NFS are different than those of BSD, Solaris, and local file system > access on Linux itself. The basis for my work is based on a bugzilla from > this customer. OK; just out of curiosity, what's the url/bug number/whatever? > My interpretation is based on looking at the local behavior on Linux, which > changes mtime/ctime even if the file size does not change, and SunOS, which > changes mtime/ctime even if the file size does not change and is very > heavily SUSv3 compliant. Fair enough. > In this case, "changed" does not mean "made different". It simply means > that the file size is set to the new value. That's ridiculous, though; that's just not what "changed" means, and that renders the "if" clause redundant. Better just to say "SUS is wrong, and this is what everybody actually does...." --b. _______________________________________________ NFS maillist - NFS@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nfs From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932266AbWFGPnN (ORCPT ); Wed, 7 Jun 2006 11:43:13 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932270AbWFGPnN (ORCPT ); Wed, 7 Jun 2006 11:43:13 -0400 Received: from mail.fieldses.org ([66.93.2.214]:14262 "EHLO pickle.fieldses.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932266AbWFGPnM (ORCPT ); Wed, 7 Jun 2006 11:43:12 -0400 Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2006 11:42:58 -0400 To: Peter Staubach Cc: Trond Myklebust , Neil Brown , NFS List , Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: [NFS] [PATCH] NFS server does not update mtime on setattr request Message-ID: <20060607154258.GA22335@fieldses.org> References: <4485C3FE.5070504@redhat.com> <1149658707.27298.10.camel@localhost> <4486E662.5080900@redhat.com> <20060607151754.GB23954@fieldses.org> <4486F020.3030707@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4486F020.3030707@redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11+cvs20060403 From: "J. Bruce Fields" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Jun 07, 2006 at 11:26:24AM -0400, Peter Staubach wrote: > J. Bruce Fields wrote: > >What's the basis for that interpretation? The language seems extremely > >clear: > > > > "On successful completion, if the file size is changed, these > > functions will mark for update the st_ctime and st_mtime fields > > of the file, and if the file is a regular file, the S_ISUID and > > S_ISGID bits of the file mode may be cleared." > > > >Why are you concerned about this? Do you have an actual application > >that breaks? > > Yes, there is a customer who is quite unhappy that the semantics over Linux > client NFS are different than those of BSD, Solaris, and local file system > access on Linux itself. The basis for my work is based on a bugzilla from > this customer. OK; just out of curiosity, what's the url/bug number/whatever? > My interpretation is based on looking at the local behavior on Linux, which > changes mtime/ctime even if the file size does not change, and SunOS, which > changes mtime/ctime even if the file size does not change and is very > heavily SUSv3 compliant. Fair enough. > In this case, "changed" does not mean "made different". It simply means > that the file size is set to the new value. That's ridiculous, though; that's just not what "changed" means, and that renders the "if" clause redundant. Better just to say "SUS is wrong, and this is what everybody actually does...." --b.