Re: [PATCH] replace inode_update_time with file_update_time

[Anton Altaparmakov <aia21@cam.ac.uk>]

On Mon, 7 Nov 2005, Shaya Potter wrote:
> 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.

Correct and I am countering that to support a read only bind mount, you do 
_not_ need this patch at all.  So I am asking whether it is needed for 
other options than read only and if so what are those.

Best regards,

	Anton
-- 
Anton Altaparmakov <aia21 at cam.ac.uk> (replace at with @)
Unix Support, Computing Service, University of Cambridge, CB2 3QH, UK
Linux NTFS maintainer / IRC: #ntfs on irc.freenode.net
WWW: http://linux-ntfs.sf.net/ & http://www-stu.christs.cam.ac.uk/~aia21/