On Thu, 2023-08-10 at 05:14 +0900, OGAWA Hirofumi wrote:
> Jeff Layton <jlayton@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
> > When you say it "doesn't work the same", what do you mean, specifically?
> > I had to make some allowances for the fact that FAT is substantially
> > different in its timestamp handling, and I tried to preserve existing
> > behavior as best I could.
>
> Ah, ok. I was misreading some.
>
> inode_update_timestamps() checks IS_I_VERSION() now, not S_VERSION. So,
> if adding the check of IS_I_VERSION() and (S_MTIME|S_CTIME|S_VERSION) to
> FAT?
>
> With it, IS_I_VERSION() would be false on FAT, and I'm fine.
>
> I.e. something like
>
> if ((flags & (S_VERSION|S_CTIME|S_MTIME)) && IS_I_VERSION(inode)
> && inode_maybe_inc_iversion(inode, false))
> dirty_flags |= I_DIRTY_SYNC;
>
> Thanks.
If you do that then the i_version counter would never be incremented.
But...I think I see what you're getting at.
Most filesystems that support the i_version counter have an on-disk
field for it. FAT obviously has no such thing. I suspect the i_version
bits in fat_update_time were added by mistake. FAT doesn't set
SB_I_VERSION so there's no need to do anything to the i_version field at
all.
Also, given that the mtime and ctime are always kept in sync on FAT,
we're probably fine to have it look something like this:
--------------------8<------------------
int fat_update_time(struct inode *inode, int flags)
{
int dirty_flags = 0;
if (inode->i_ino == MSDOS_ROOT_INO)
return 0;
fat_truncate_time(inode, NULL, flags);
if (inode->i_sb->s_flags & SB_LAZYTIME)
dirty_flags |= I_DIRTY_TIME;
else
dirty_flags |= I_DIRTY_SYNC;
__mark_inode_dirty(inode, dirty_flags);
return 0;
}
--------------------8<------------------
...and we should probably do that in a separate patch in advance of the
update_time rework, since it's really a different change.
If you're in agreement, then I'll plan to respin the series with this
fixed and resend.
Thanks for being patient!
--
Jeff Layton <jlayton@xxxxxxxxxx>
