From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [git pull] vfs for rc2, part 1 Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2010 12:52:35 -0400 Message-ID: <20100818165235.GA24783@infradead.org> References: <20100818153528.GO31363@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Al Viro , Jan Kara , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org To: Linus Torvalds Return-path: Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([18.85.46.34]:37755 "EHLO bombadil.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751360Ab0HRQwj (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 Aug 2010 12:52:39 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 09:44:34AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 8:35 AM, Al Viro wrote: > > > > Jan Kara (1): > > ? ? ?vfs: update ctime when changing the file's permission by setfacl > > What dirties the inode for this case? It seems to just set i_ctime > directly, how does it actually get written back to disk? > > Or is this purely a tmpfs/shmfs issue? Maybe a comment on that would > have been good. Yes, that code currently is just used for in-memory filesystems. Both the generic_acl name for the file and the vfs: prefix for the patch are rather confusing.