From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Josef Bacik Subject: Re: [RFC] [PATCH 1/2] fs: introduce inode operation ->update_time Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2012 13:12:40 -0400 Message-ID: <20120430171238.GA1959@localhost.localdomain> References: <1332771031-3337-1-git-send-email-josef@redhat.com> <20120430152147.GA20554@infradead.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Josef Bacik , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk, linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org To: Christoph Hellwig Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20120430152147.GA20554@infradead.org> List-ID: On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 11:21:47AM -0400, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 10:10:30AM -0400, Josef Bacik wrote: > > Btrfs has to make sure we have space to allocate new blocks in order to modify > > the inode, so updating time can fail. We've gotten around this by having our > > own file_update_time but this is kind of a pain, and Christoph has indicated he > > would like to make xfs do something different with atime updates. So introduce > > ->update_time, where we will deal with i_version an a/m/c time updates and > > indicate which changes need to be made. The normal version just does what it > > has always done, updates the time and marks the inode dirty, and then > > filesystems can choose to do something different. > > > > I've gone through all of the users of file_update_time and made them check for > > errors with the exception of the fault code since it's complicated and I wasn't > > quite sure what to do there, also Jan is going to be pushing the file time > > updates into page_mkwrite for those who have it so that should satisfy btrfs and > > make it not a big deal to check the file_update_time() return code in the > > generic fault path. Thanks, > > Any reason that atime updates ignore the return value? > > Otherwise looks fine, > Yeah I figure it's not nice to return ENOSPC when somebody is doing a lookup, I'm open to other suggestions, but btrfs especially hits this with some of the ENOSPC xfstests and I think that could lead to unhappy users. Thanks, Josef