public inbox for linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
To: Taesoo Kim <taesoo@gatech.edu>
Cc: cmaiolino@redhat.com, sanidhya@gatech.edu,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, xfs@oss.sgi.com, blee@gatech.edu,
	linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, lczerner@redhat.com,
	csong84@gatech.edu, changwoo@gatech.edu
Subject: Re: inconsistent timestamp update in rename() of xfs/fat/gfs2/ramfs/jffs2...
Date: Sat, 21 Mar 2015 09:28:43 +1100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150320222843.GK28621@dastard> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150320202339.GK25797@taesoo.org>

On Fri, Mar 20, 2015 at 04:23:39PM -0400, Taesoo Kim wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> We've cross-checking patches from ext3/ext4, and found out
> inconsistent implementations of other fs. We want to ask whether this
> is intended or unexpected behavior. We will be able to send patches as
> soon as confirmed/acknowledged.
> 
> Ref.
> 
> (ext4) 53b7e9f6807c1274eee19201396b4c2b5f721553
> (ext3) 0b23076988b44b2c165e060248345de6f2337387
> 
>  | ext3/4: fix update of mtime and ctime on rename
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> We summarized our finding:
>   (* means what we believe is correct beahvoir)
> 
> <Linux 4.0-rc2>
>                                         ramfs   affs    fsplus
>                         vfs xfs fat gfs2    jffs2   hfsh
> operation          | * |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
> ===========================================================
> new_inode->i_ctime | V | - | - | V | V | - | - | V | - | -

This timestamp behaviour is undefined by posix, therefore all
filesystems are behaving "correctly" according to the POSIX
specification regardless of whether this timestamp is updated or
not.

http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/functions/rename.html

....
Upon successful completion, rename() shall mark for update the last data
modification and last file status change timestamps of the parent directory of
each file.
....
APPLICATION USAGE

Some implementations mark for update the last file status change timestamp of
renamed files and some do not. Applications which make use of the last file
status change timestamp may behave differently with respect to renamed files
unless they are designed to allow for either behavior.
....

Cheers,

Dave.
-- 
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com

_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs

      reply	other threads:[~2015-03-20 22:28 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-03-20 20:23 inconsistent timestamp update in rename() of xfs/fat/gfs2/ramfs/jffs2 Taesoo Kim
2015-03-20 22:28 ` Dave Chinner [this message]

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=20150320222843.GK28621@dastard \
    --to=david@fromorbit.com \
    --cc=blee@gatech.edu \
    --cc=changwoo@gatech.edu \
    --cc=cmaiolino@redhat.com \
    --cc=csong84@gatech.edu \
    --cc=lczerner@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=sanidhya@gatech.edu \
    --cc=taesoo@gatech.edu \
    --cc=xfs@oss.sgi.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