linux-ext4.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@redhat.com>
To: ext4 development <linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: How is e2fsck's time_fudge supposed to behave?
Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2015 17:31:18 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <55036536.5030300@redhat.com> (raw)

I'm a little confused by e2fsck's time fudge current behavior, vs its
apparent intent.

We do:

	if ( ... &&
            fs->super->s_mtime > (__u32) ctx->now) {
                pctx.num = fs->super->s_mtime;
                problem = PR_0_FUTURE_SB_LAST_MOUNT;
                if (fs->super->s_mtime <= (__u32) ctx->now + ctx->time_fudge)
                        problem = PR_0_FUTURE_SB_LAST_MOUNT_FUDGED;
                if (fix_problem(ctx, problem, &pctx)) {
                        fs->super->s_mtime = ctx->now;
                        fs->flags |= EXT2_FLAG_DIRTY;
                }

So if we are inside the time_fudge value we simply change the problem,
but PR_0_FUTURE_SB_LAST_MOUNT_FUDGED behaves exactly like
PR_0_FUTURE_SB_LAST_MOUNT, other than the message:

        /* Last mount time is in the future (fudged) */
        { PR_0_FUTURE_SB_LAST_MOUNT_FUDGED,
          N_("@S last mount time is in the future.\n\t(by less than a day, "
             "probably due to the hardware clock being incorrectly set)  "),
          PROMPT_FIX, PR_PREEN_OK | PR_NO_OK },

vs:

        /* Last mount time is in the future */
        { PR_0_FUTURE_SB_LAST_MOUNT,
          N_("@S last mount time (%t,\n\tnow = %T) is in the future.\n"),
          PROMPT_FIX, PR_PREEN_OK | PR_NO_OK },

So unless I'm missing something, the whole fudge_time dance does nothing
except change the message, and after reading lots of words in the e2fsck.conf
manpage ;) this bit seems relevant as to the intent:

> So by default, we allow the superblock  times  to
> be  fudged  by  up to 24 hours.

I had the impression that "allow" meant "ignore" but this still triggers
exactly the same action and correction.  Is that as intended?

I'll send a patch do a printf and take no other action if inside the
fudge_time window, if that seems like the right thing to do.

Thanks,
-Eric

             reply	other threads:[~2015-03-13 22:31 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-03-13 22:31 Eric Sandeen [this message]
2015-03-17 17:32 ` How is e2fsck's time_fudge supposed to behave? Jan Kara
2015-03-18 18:58   ` Eric Sandeen

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=55036536.5030300@redhat.com \
    --to=sandeen@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
    /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).