From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Shaya Potter Subject: Re: [PATCH] replace inode_update_time with file_update_time Date: Mon, 07 Nov 2005 17:10:20 -0500 Message-ID: <1131401420.8063.11.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <20051029165209.GA26446@lst.de> <1131400349.8063.7.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Christoph Hellwig , akpm@osdl.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org Return-path: Received: from opus.cs.columbia.edu ([128.59.20.100]:46843 "EHLO opus.cs.columbia.edu") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S965327AbVKGWLC (ORCPT ); Mon, 7 Nov 2005 17:11:02 -0500 To: Anton Altaparmakov In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org On Mon, 2005-11-07 at 22:02 +0000, Anton Altaparmakov wrote: > On Mon, 7 Nov 2005, Shaya Potter wrote: > > On Mon, 2005-11-07 at 21:40 +0000, Anton Altaparmakov wrote: > > > On Sat, 29 Oct 2005, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > > > To allow various options to work per-mount instead of per-sb we need > > > > > > What are those various options? Please spell them out. (I mean it! I > > > really do not know what you have in mind and I cannot see anything that > > > would require a vfs mount wrt cmtime updates.) > > > > I'm thinking you should think of things like read only bind mounts, > > where even meta data wont be updated. > > But that is my point! A read-only bind mount is just like any other > read-only mount and should never even try to update metadata. there's no such thing as a read only bind mount right now, I believe this is to enable support of such a thing, but I could be wrong.