From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list xfs); Mon, 18 Feb 2008 17:55:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from larry.melbourne.sgi.com (larry.melbourne.sgi.com [134.14.52.130]) by oss.sgi.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11/SuSE Linux 0.7) with SMTP id m1J1sviR020082 for ; Mon, 18 Feb 2008 17:55:01 -0800 Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2008 12:55:20 +1100 From: David Chinner Subject: Re: [patch] Don't change ctime in truncate is size does not change Message-ID: <20080219015520.GA155407@sgi.com> References: <20080218233251.GV155407@sgi.com> <47BA16CC.7040700@sgi.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <47BA16CC.7040700@sgi.com> Sender: xfs-bounce@oss.sgi.com Errors-to: xfs-bounce@oss.sgi.com List-Id: xfs To: Mark Goodwin Cc: David Chinner , xfs-dev , xfs-oss On Tue, Feb 19, 2008 at 10:37:48AM +1100, Mark Goodwin wrote: > Did we ever discover what was behind the comment: > "Have to do this even if the file's size doesn't change" It was put there when the patch was checked in - I can only assume that it was done this way because the old test script that was being run didn't discriminate between the truncate and truncate differences. Basically, both the code and the comment are wrong and needed to be fixed.... Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner Principal Engineer SGI Australian Software Group