On Thu, 2007-05-17 at 09:40 +1000, David Chinner wrote: > On Wed, May 16, 2007 at 07:21:16AM -0500, Dave Kleikamp wrote: > > On Wed, 2007-05-16 at 13:16 +1000, David Chinner wrote: > > > Please don't make this always happen. c/mtime updates should be dependent > > > on the mode being used and whether there is visible change to the file. If no > > > userspace visible changes to the file occurred, then timestamps should not > > > be changed. > > > > i_blocks will be updated, so it seems reasonable to update ctime. mtime > > shouldn't be changed, though, since the contents of the file will be > > unchanged. > > That's assuming blocks were actually allocated - if the prealloc range already > has underlying blocks there is no change and so we should not be changing > mtime either. Only the filesystem will know if it has changed the file, so I > think that timestamp updates need to be driven down to that level, not done > blindy at the highest layer.... Yes, I agree. Shaggy -- David Kleikamp IBM Linux Technology Center - 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
