From: hch <hch@lst.de>
To: Trond Myklebust <trondmy@primarydata.com>
Cc: hch <hch@lst.de>, "bfields@redhat.com" <bfields@redhat.com>,
"jlayton@poochiereds.net" <jlayton@poochiereds.net>,
"linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org" <linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] nfsd: special case truncates some more
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2017 18:38:17 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170123173817.GA22777@lst.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1485192333.34422.1.camel@primarydata.com>
On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 05:25:34PM +0000, Trond Myklebust wrote:
> In that case the client will be required to continue to need to send
> mtime/ctime in order to ensure that we get the same historical
> semantics w.r.t. ftruncate() vs truncate().
>
> IOW: It's not a question of the client being lazy about clearing the
> flags. It's a question of enforcing the correct semantics.
No, the NFS spec requires the server to add an implicit mtime
when the size actually changes. In fact the current code has a comment
pointing to the section:
* RFC5661, Section 18.30.4:
* Changing the size of a file with SETATTR indirectly
* changes the time_modify and change attributes.
*
* (and similar for the older RFCs)
And yes, I've double checked that in the RFC.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-01-23 17:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-01-22 16:54 setattr ATTR_SIZE vs the rest Christoph Hellwig
2017-01-22 16:54 ` [PATCH] nfsd: special case truncates some more Christoph Hellwig
2017-01-23 12:21 ` Jeff Layton
2017-01-23 12:33 ` Christoph Hellwig
2017-01-23 15:36 ` Christoph Hellwig
2017-01-23 15:52 ` Jeff Layton
2017-01-23 16:05 ` Christoph Hellwig
2017-01-23 16:14 ` Jeff Layton
2017-01-23 16:20 ` Trond Myklebust
2017-01-23 16:26 ` hch
2017-01-23 17:25 ` Trond Myklebust
2017-01-23 17:38 ` hch [this message]
2017-01-23 17:42 ` Trond Myklebust
2017-01-24 16:25 ` J. Bruce Fields
2017-01-24 22:02 ` J. Bruce Fields
2017-01-23 16:58 ` setattr ATTR_SIZE vs the rest J. Bruce Fields
2017-01-24 7:52 ` Christoph Hellwig
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2017-02-20 6:21 split setattr operations take 2 Christoph Hellwig
2017-02-20 6:21 ` [PATCH] nfsd: special case truncates some more Christoph Hellwig
2017-02-20 22:23 ` J. Bruce Fields
2017-02-21 15:07 ` Chuck Lever
2017-02-21 15:14 ` J. Bruce Fields
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=20170123173817.GA22777@lst.de \
--to=hch@lst.de \
--cc=bfields@redhat.com \
--cc=jlayton@poochiereds.net \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=trondmy@primarydata.com \
/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).