From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff Layton Subject: Re: 2.6.36 merge plans Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2010 13:46:54 -0400 Message-ID: <20100802134654.3ac129e7@tlielax.poochiereds.net> References: <20100630141755.4ac97143@tlielax.poochiereds.net> <4C2CDD02.2090403@suse.de> <20100701195247.71c3f572@tlielax.poochiereds.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Cc: Suresh Jayaraman , Shirish Pargaonkar , linux-fsdevel , linux-cifs-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Steve French Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-cifs-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org On Fri, 23 Jul 2010 17:19:29 -0500 Steve French wrote: > On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 6:52 PM, Jeff Layton wrot= e: > > On Thu, 1 Jul 2010 16:55:58 -0500 > > Steve French wrote: > >> For =A0 cifs: use CreationTime like an i_generation field > >> Seems like a good idea, but what happens if server is unix one wit= hout > >> birth time, eg samba with no xattr support and changes creation ti= me > >> (ie uses last mtime or some such) frequently - e.g. on every write= ? > >> Would that break your aprroach? > >> > > > > Aye, there's the rub. This makes a ton of sense for windows where w= e > > can count on a valid create time. Samba servers may be problematic = here, > > but with most of them we'll be using unix extensions and you don't = get > > create times there anyway. The problem may be samba or other > > non-windows servers without unix extensions that fake up create tim= es. > > > > We could consider a mount option or something to ignore create time= s, > > but how to document when it should be used? IMO, fake create times = are > > really a server bug. Do we hobble servers where this is done correc= tly? >=20 > Jeff, > I merged the other patches from your tree, but wanted to think more a= bout > http://git.kernel.org/?p=3Dlinux/kernel/git/jlayton/linux.git;a=3Dcom= mit;h=3De5b7e004ed0ccdcf5fd3b1b0aff2a1a45023912b > ie the CreationTime i_generation patch and what happens to servers > which don't have creation time - presumably e.g. most Samba servers > on Linux can't get to creation time. Any additional thoughts on this= ? >=20 Hi Steve, Looks like Linus released 2.6.35 yesterday. There's still a patch in my tree that's unmerged as of yet and that I'd like to see go into 2.6.36: cifs: reduce false positives with inode aliasing serverino autodisable =2E..any reason that you haven't merged it yet? --=20 Jeff Layton