From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S964784AbXC2E7t (ORCPT ); Thu, 29 Mar 2007 00:59:49 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S964838AbXC2E7t (ORCPT ); Thu, 29 Mar 2007 00:59:49 -0400 Received: from smtp104.mail.mud.yahoo.com ([209.191.85.214]:47455 "HELO smtp104.mail.mud.yahoo.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S964784AbXC2E7s (ORCPT ); Thu, 29 Mar 2007 00:59:48 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com.au; h=Received:X-YMail-OSG:Message-ID:Date:From:User-Agent:X-Accept-Language:MIME-Version:To:CC:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=Z4VermDkNvChd4ToNlGU3hXCLbtzgy1Plpm+8yaDzwIKmQF8tUk/n6n/qMMI5ndUeXAuMRV2LJQlCML+1T1snje+DifQF26M39pgIf9Yo29RcvQmyJ/OWFpJsL3aVR/kM4AVvHkApnZiAwm193F8Rw4ASwIG746hbpMmeMb42eM= ; X-YMail-OSG: GlxwV6cVM1nFDrbKvEqnScYM6vkrsPtWJV_szUbyHp_XD.sIsTw5_syGnKLnJIY5A5Ry3FzkV1hVQHnnfi4DBv2tj7qlDGjJf4ZdOL6z_Dw6Sb1p1wg- Message-ID: <460B47BE.5080502@yahoo.com.au> Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2007 14:59:42 +1000 From: Nick Piggin User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7.12) Gecko/20051007 Debian/1.7.12-1 X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: linux@horizon.com CC: akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, miklos@szeredi.hu Subject: Re: [patch resend v4] update ctime and mtime for mmaped write References: <20070328095014.20945.qmail@science.horizon.com> In-Reply-To: <20070328095014.20945.qmail@science.horizon.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org linux@horizon.com wrote: >>But if you didn't notice until now, then the current implementation >>must be pretty reasonable for you use as well. > > > Oh, I definitely noticed. As soon as I tried to port my application > to 2.6, it broke - as evidenced by my complaints last year. The > current solution is simple - since it's running on dedicated boxes, > leave them on 2.4. Well I didn't know that was a change in behaviour vs 2.4 (or maybe I did and forgot). That was probably a bit silly, unless there was a good reason for it. -- SUSE Labs, Novell Inc.