public inbox for linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Lachlan McIlroy <lachlan@sgi.com>
To: David Chinner <dgc@sgi.com>
Cc: Utako Kusaka <u-kusaka@wm.jp.nec.com>, xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] flush inode when changing atime.
Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2007 13:52:49 +1000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4716D891.1060108@sgi.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20071017090844.GZ995458@sgi.com>

David Chinner wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 17, 2007 at 01:56:00PM +0900, Utako Kusaka wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> The atime is changed for reading but it returns to a previous value
>> after unmount. i_update_core is still off after reading a file using
>> read(), readdir() and readlink(). So an inode isn't flushed to disk.
> 
> I think this was done by design - Christoph? I can't remember exactly
> as it was more than two years ago this change was made. It is effectively
> equivalent to using the relatime mount option.
> 
> The question is whether we want to change the default behaviour or
> whether we need to supply an "atimeisatime" mount option for those
> that really need atime to be updated on every access.
> 
If we change it back then will anything that scans the filesystem cause
inodes to be dirtied and create a lot of inode flush traffic that we
don't currently have?

>> I referred to following fix when I made a patch:
>> TAKE 946679 - fix, speedup and simplify atime handling
>> http://marc.info/?l=linux-xfs&m=113398234310217&w=4
> 
> Yes, that was the patch that removed the explicit atime updates
> in the XFS code. Your fix is reverting part of that change.
> 
>> --- linux-2.6-xfs.orig/fs/xfs/xfs_vnodeops.c	2007-10-15 15:50:10.000000000 +0900
>> +++ linux-2.6-xfs/fs/xfs/xfs_vnodeops.c	2007-10-15 16:49:35.000000000 +0900
>> @@ -1003,6 +1003,8 @@ xfs_readlink(
>>  		error = xfs_readlink_bmap(ip, link);
>>  	}
>>  
>> +	ip->i_update_core = 1;
>> +
> 
> If we are going to put these back in, then they should be
> calls to xfs_ichgtime_fast() so that we know what the reason
> for marking the core dirty is.
> 

xfs_ichgtime_fast() will also dirty the linux inode so that sync
will push out the change.

  reply	other threads:[~2007-10-18  3:48 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2007-10-17  4:56 [PATCH] flush inode when changing atime Utako Kusaka
2007-10-17  9:08 ` David Chinner
2007-10-18  3:52   ` Lachlan McIlroy [this message]
2007-10-18  4:17     ` David Chinner
2007-10-18  8:01       ` Lachlan McIlroy

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=4716D891.1060108@sgi.com \
    --to=lachlan@sgi.com \
    --cc=dgc@sgi.com \
    --cc=u-kusaka@wm.jp.nec.com \
    --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