From: Matthew Garrett <mjg59@srcf.ucam.org>
To: Peter Moulder <pjrm@mail.internode.on.net>
Cc: "Ingo Molnar" <mingo@elte.hu>,
"Éric Piel" <E.A.B.Piel@tudelft.nl>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH, resend] relatime: Let relatime update atime at least once per day
Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2009 13:32:20 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090108133220.GA11254@srcf.ucam.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090108122952.GA19743@mail.internode.on.net>
On Thu, Jan 08, 2009 at 11:29:53PM +1100, Peter Moulder wrote:
> What was the fate of Ingo's previous patch[*1] to implement this (which,
> incidentally, also included updates to documentation and made the interval
> configurable as Éric Piel suggests) ?
Nobody merged it and Ingo got bored of pushing it. I sent it earlier,
but nobody came up with an especially good argument for the
configurability and everyone seemed to want to paint the patch pink with
yellow polka dots, so I gave up and just sent a minimal one in the hope
that nobody could find anything to complain about.
> Just a minor nit, but the patch description (not included in the patch itself)
> "at least once a day" isn't particularly accurate given that the patch enforces
> at least a day [minus a second or so] has elapsed since the last update. The
> description in the above-referenced patch "only once a day" better captures the
> situation, I think.
If mtime is changed then atime will be updated on the next access, so
you can easily have more than one atime update a day.
--
Matthew Garrett | mjg59@srcf.ucam.org
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Matthew Garrett <mjg59@srcf.ucam.org>
To: Peter Moulder <pjrm@mail.internode.on.net>
Cc: "Ingo Molnar" <mingo@elte.hu>,
"Éric Piel" <E.A.B.Piel@tudelft.nl>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH, resend] relatime: Let relatime update atime at least once per day
Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2009 13:32:20 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090108133220.GA11254@srcf.ucam.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090108122952.GA19743@mail.internode.on.net>
On Thu, Jan 08, 2009 at 11:29:53PM +1100, Peter Moulder wrote:
> What was the fate of Ingo's previous patch[*1] to implement this (which,
> incidentally, also included updates to documentation and made the interval
> configurable as Éric Piel suggests) ?
Nobody merged it and Ingo got bored of pushing it. I sent it earlier,
but nobody came up with an especially good argument for the
configurability and everyone seemed to want to paint the patch pink with
yellow polka dots, so I gave up and just sent a minimal one in the hope
that nobody could find anything to complain about.
> Just a minor nit, but the patch description (not included in the patch itself)
> "at least once a day" isn't particularly accurate given that the patch enforces
> at least a day [minus a second or so] has elapsed since the last update. The
> description in the above-referenced patch "only once a day" better captures the
> situation, I think.
If mtime is changed then atime will be updated on the next access, so
you can easily have more than one atime update a day.
--
Matthew Garrett | mjg59@srcf.ucam.org
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-01-08 13:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-12-28 15:29 [PATCH, resend] relatime: Let relatime update atime at least once per day Matthew Garrett
2008-12-28 18:35 ` Jesper Juhl
2008-12-28 20:19 ` Matthew Garrett
2008-12-28 19:04 ` Éric Piel
2008-12-28 19:59 ` Matthew Garrett
2008-12-28 19:59 ` Matthew Garrett
2008-12-28 21:24 ` Éric Piel
2008-12-28 21:36 ` Matthew Wilcox
2008-12-28 21:38 ` Matthew Garrett
2008-12-28 21:38 ` Matthew Garrett
2009-01-08 12:29 ` Peter Moulder
2009-01-08 12:29 ` Peter Moulder
2009-01-08 13:32 ` Matthew Garrett [this message]
2009-01-08 13:32 ` Matthew Garrett
[not found] <fa.v5U3CdNO/bF+SC9Lx2IrNK0ksBw@ifi.uio.no>
[not found] ` <fa./Q0ErjvWHKMrOCYUQaeuJBQ1U8A@ifi.uio.no>
[not found] ` <fa.pfgwZ2DZZy7psm2o5/f7mrtpRUA@ifi.uio.no>
[not found] ` <fa./KluIoJB1+QtfX+SyKcE+SysfKU@ifi.uio.no>
[not found] ` <fa.YKGFdZah7xr94yJzEWemIAnOKNA@ifi.uio.no>
2008-12-28 22:53 ` Sitsofe Wheeler
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20090108133220.GA11254@srcf.ucam.org \
--to=mjg59@srcf.ucam.org \
--cc=E.A.B.Piel@tudelft.nl \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=pjrm@mail.internode.on.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.