Sorry for the late answer.
I agree that using i_version field sounds better, I'm working on it.
regards,
Jean noel
Andreas Dilger wrote:
On Nov 29, 2006 19:54 +0100, Jean-Noel Cordenner wrote:
This part of the patch concerns the ext4 code.
I was looking more closely at this code, and wondering two things:
- why not just use the existing inode->i_version field instead of
adding a new i_change_attribute? The i_version is not used by
the VFS at all, and only for detecting directory modifications in
ext3 (where it has the same semantic as the new i_change_attribute
anyways). This avoids bloating the VFS inode more than it already is.
- why not just do an increment of i_version in ext3_do_update_inode()?
That is ext3_dirty_inode->ext3_mark_inode_dirty->ext3_mark_iloc_dirty()
and also handles all of the VFS locations that call notify_change().
This MUST be called anywhere that we make a persistent change to the
inode in order to flush it to disk. That would reduce the patch to
a few lines at most. I don't think there are any places we need to
supplement this (even mmap IO or writes to a hole will update mtime).
Cheers, Andreas
--
Andreas Dilger
Principal Software Engineer
Cluster File Systems, Inc.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
