linux-btrfs.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Satoru Takeuchi <takeuchi_satoru@jp.fujitsu.com>
To: Andreas Dilger <adilger@sun.com>,
	Chris Mason <chris.mason@oracle.com>,
	Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com>, John Stultz <johnstul@us.ibm.com>,
	"Ted Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>, Thomas Gleixner <
Subject: [RFC][PATCH] make file's timestamp more accurate
Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2010 17:42:50 +0900	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4C7CC08A.9010302@jp.fujitsu.com> (raw)

Hi,

linux has supported nanosecond order file's timestamp since 2.5.48.
However current file timestamp is got by current_fs_time() and
is only updated once a tick. It can't say true nanosecond accuracy.
In addition, gettimeofday() before a file operation updating
{a,c,m}time would outstrip file's timestamp because of the difference
about time source between gettimeofday() and file's timestamp.
A certain kind of application would corrupted by this problem.

I attached a most simple patch fixing this problem here. However
it has several problems and I don't say it can be applied as is.
The most big two problems is the following:

 - It would cause performance regression, especially in
   not TSC capable system.
 - Is gettimeofday()'s monotonicity reliable on all systems?

The relative discussion:
http://lkml.org/lkml/2010/7/13/443

Does anybody have good idea? Should it be tunable, for example?

Thanks,
Satoru

Index: linux-2.6.36-rc3/kernel/time.c
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.36-rc3.orig/kernel/time.c 2010-08-31 16:07:43.000000000 +0900
+++ linux-2.6.36-rc3/kernel/time.c      2010-08-31 16:08:11.000000000 +0900
@@ -227,7 +227,8 @@ SYSCALL_DEFINE1(adjtimex, struct timex _
  */
 struct timespec current_fs_time(struct super_block *sb)
 {
-       struct timespec now = current_kernel_time();
+       struct timespec now;
+       getnstimeofday(&now);
        return timespec_trunc(now, sb->s_time_gran);
 }
 EXPORT_SYMBOL(current_fs_time);


             reply	other threads:[~2010-08-31  8:42 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-08-31  8:42 Satoru Takeuchi [this message]
2010-09-09 16:23 ` [RFC][PATCH] make file's timestamp more accurate john stultz
2010-09-10  5:54   ` Satoru Takeuchi

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=4C7CC08A.9010302@jp.fujitsu.com \
    --to=takeuchi_satoru@jp.fujitsu.com \
    --cc=adilger@sun.com \
    --cc=chris.mason@oracle.com \
    --cc=johnstul@us.ibm.com \
    --cc=jolsa@redhat.com \
    --cc=tytso@mit.edu \
    /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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).