From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda1.sgi.com [192.48.157.11]) by oss.sgi.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/SuSE Linux 0.8) with ESMTP id nBMCY6QU131351 for ; Tue, 22 Dec 2009 06:34:07 -0600 Received: from mail.internode.on.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cuda.sgi.com (Spam Firewall) with ESMTP id 29ACC14FEBCE for ; Tue, 22 Dec 2009 04:34:46 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.internode.on.net (bld-mail19.adl2.internode.on.net [150.101.137.104]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id 8IYVnxNP8TBeYK8s for ; Tue, 22 Dec 2009 04:34:46 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2009 23:34:36 +1100 From: Dave Chinner Subject: Re: utimensat fails to update ctime Message-ID: <20091222123436.GC9611@discord.disaster> References: <4B2B156D.9040604@byu.net> <87aaxclr4q.fsf@devron.myhome.or.jp> <4B2F7421.10005@byu.net> <4B2F7A95.3010708@byu.net> <87hbrkjrk8.fsf@devron.myhome.or.jp> <4B304D04.6040501@byu.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4B304D04.6040501@byu.net> List-Id: XFS Filesystem from SGI List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: Eric Blake Cc: Christoph Hellwig , Linux Kernel Mailing List , OGAWA Hirofumi , xfs@oss.sgi.com On Mon, Dec 21, 2009 at 09:37:24PM -0700, Eric Blake wrote: > According to OGAWA Hirofumi on 12/21/2009 8:05 AM: > >> It may also be file-system dependent. On the machine where I saw the > >> original failure: > >>> $ uname -a > >>> Linux fencepost 2.6.26-2-xen-amd64 #1 SMP Thu Nov 5 04:27:12 UTC 2009 > >>> x86_64 GNU/Linux > >> $ df -T . > >> Filesystem Type 1K-blocks Used Available Use% Mounted on > >> /dev/sdb1 xfs 419299328 269018656 150280672 65% /srv/data > > > > Thanks. > > > > This is good point. This would be xfs issue or design. xfs seems to have > > own special handling of ctime. Yeah, it looks like the change to utimesat() back in 2.6.26 for posix conformance made ATTR_CTIME appear outside inode truncation and XFS wasn't updated for this change in behaviour at the VFS level. Looks simple to fix, but I'm worried about introducing other unintended ctime modifications - is there a test suite that checks posix compliant atime/mtime/ctime behaviour around anywhere? Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@fromorbit.com _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs